9.9 C
Brussels
Friday, November 15, 2024
Home Blog Page 202

Children forcibly separated from mothers at Syria’s Al Hol, warns top rights expert

By
United Nations News
-
0
Children forcibly separated from mothers at Syria’s Al Hol, warns top rights expert

Fionnuala Ni Aolain, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, is the first independent rights expert to gain access to the infamous facilities Al Hol and Al Raj, as well as other places of detention.

After her six-day visit to northeast Syria, Ms. Ni Aolain said conditions in both camps constituted arbitrary and indefinite mass detention with no prospect of legal or judicial process for those being held. 

Reliable witness

“I was able to witness first-hand, including mass arbitrary detention of children, incommunicado detention, disappearances, structural and systematic discrimination for the detained person on the basis of their nationality,” she told reporters.

The rights expert, who was appointed by the UN Human Rights Council in June 2017, said that she also witnessed the systematic practice of boys being separated from their mothers in the camps – “most frequently in the middle of the night or in the marketplace”.

She added: “Every single woman I spoke to made clear that it was the snatching of their children that provided the most anxiety, the most suffering, the most psychological harm.”

The policy is based on an unproven security risk that male children are said to present when they become adolescents. 

Fear ‘palpable’

“The fear of boys below 10 (of being taken away) is palpable,” she recalled, after meeting large number of traumatised boys and their mothers. 

Speaking in Geneva, the rights expert expressed alarm that violence and deep insecurity pervade the detention centres – where some 56,000 suspected extremists and families of alleged ISIL fighters are reportedly detained.

Eight in 10 are under 12, including “a two-year-old who’s currently living in this facility, who doesn’t get returned home and lives in a situation of mass, arbitrary detention throughout his or her life”, she said.

Ms. Ní Aoláin also reiterated concerns around the practices of incommunicado detention and disappearances, including against children in the Gweiran Sina’a / Panorama prison, as well as a confirmed tuberculosis outbreak, exacerbating the health crisis in the facility.

Ms. Ní Aoláin’s main concern was for the mass and indefinite detention of children which constitutes an “absolute contravention of international law in what appears to be a never-ending cycle of cradle to grave in detention”.

Rare access

Visiting sites of detention in Qamishli, Gweiran, Al Hol and Al-Malikiyah, Ms. Ni Aolain insisted that meaningful access to places of detention was essential to ensure that serious human rights violations can be identified, reported and prevented – including in high-security sites.

The rights expert also raised concerns around the complete lack of access and oversight of the so-called “Annex” at Al Hol, where she reported seeing women who were visibly ill. The facility is home to thousands of third country nationals held for alleged security reasons. 

“We cannot hold 10,000 people in a box where no one sees what happens to them and their children, it is fundamentally unacceptable by any measure of a civilised and humane treatment of persons in condition of detention,” she said. 

Repatriation plea

The UN Special Rapporteur appealed to the 57 countries whose nationals are detained in northeast Syria to live up to their fundamental human rights obligations by repatriating their nationals.

To date, 36 countries have repatriated Syria’s third country nationals since 2019, but at current rates, it will take a minimum of 20 years before all detainees can go home.

Given that 77 per cent of those repatriated are women and children, the rights expert noted that most countries were not returning adult men – adding to further separation concerns.

Repatriation crucial

Repatriation was crucial for all those still held in northeast Syria, Ms. Ni Aolain continued, as they had been deprived “the fundamental capacity to live a dignified life in detention, including access to water, food and health care…All of these things undermine the right to life and make the return to countries of nationality absolutely imperative.”

Warning about the likely future impact of inaction, Ms. Ni Aolain said that “anyone thinking about long-term security in this region – you are closing eyes to long-term security implications of holding children in these conditions.” 

Special Rapporteurs and other UN Human Rights Council-appointed rights experts, work on a voluntary and unpaid basis, are not UN staff, and work independently from any government or organisation.

Source link

Studying Moscow’s Coercive Campaign Against Norway: The Bear is Awake

By
Runar Spansvoll
-
0
Studying Moscow’s Coercive Campaign Against Norway: The Bear is Awake


Norway’s geopolitical position as both a neighbour of Russia and a member of NATO places it at the forefront of Moscow’s self-assertive and aggressive foreign and security policy. However, Norway’s NATO membership reduces Russia’s room for manoeuvre to actions below the threshold of armed conflict. In this article, Runar Spansvoll examines how Russia has made use of such aggressive and coercive sub-threshold activities in the political, information and military domains between 2014–23 in a campaign to compel Oslo to comply with its foreign and security policy objectives.

Source link

In Hot Water: Climate Change, IUU Fishing and Illicit Finance

By
Guest Author
-
0
Studying Moscow’s Coercive Campaign Against Norway: The Bear is Awake


For instance, the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative was launched in 2002 to facilitate the voluntary disclosure by governments and firms of the beneficial owners of extractive companies. Sadly, the initiative only targets oil, gas and mineral resources, with IUU fishing having been ignored.

Meanwhile, the Fisheries Transparency Initiative (FiTI) highlights efforts to increase transparency around beneficial ownership, covering the importance of beneficial ownership in its Standard, which defines the information national authorities should publish online about their fisheries sectors. A number of states have signed on to the FiTI Standard. As the first country to report on its commitments, in 2020 the Seychelles passed legislation (the Beneficial Ownership Act 2020) requiring the maintenance of up-to-date registers of beneficial owners, with a central register of beneficial owners in place by 2021. Yet initiatives such as FiTI face a range of issues, not least uptake by a limited number of countries to date and the fact that it only asks countries to report on their progress in implementing public beneficial ownership registries, rather than making it a requirement of adopting the Standard.

Action from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) – the global financial crime watchdog – has also been slow. In 2020, FATF highlighted the ways in which widespread use of shell and front companies enables the import and export of endangered wildlife products. A year later, FATF expanded its focus from illegal wildlife trade (IWT) to money laundering risks linked to illegal logging, illegal mining and waste trafficking. But disappointingly, FATF has continued to ignore IUU fishing to date.

In the absence of attention paid by FATF to this issue, in 2022, the Asia-Pacific Group on Money Laundering (APG) included a chapter in its typologies report on the illicit finance dimension of IUU fishing, providing case studies and analysis that underline the industrialised nature of the issue. Other FATF-style regional bodies, however, have yet to turn their focus to IUU fishing. They have failed to follow the APG’s example despite the clear demonstration that there is no need to wait for FATF itself – particularly when the impacts of an issue such as IUU fishing are of particular concern to members (often across the Global South).This lack of widespread action comes despite the fact that the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) reference natural resource crimes including fisheries crime and tax abuse in the fishing industry as contributing factors to illicit financial flows, as included in SDG target 16.4.1.

Encouragingly, the G7 Climate and Environment Ministers’ Communiqué released in May 2021 welcomed ‘discussions by Finance Ministers on strengthening beneficial ownership transparency to better tackle the illicit financial flows stemming from IWT and other illicit threats to nature’. Yet, again, IUU fishing was not named specifically. This is despite the fact that G7 countries account for the majority of the global seafood market, with this omission reflecting the limited political will to tackle this crisis.

Meanwhile, broader trends in relation to progress on transparency of beneficial ownership could have negative implications for the fisheries sector. Notably, in November 2022, the EU Court of Justice approved a ruling that stands to stall progress by invalidating provisions of the EU’s Anti-Money Laundering Directive that allowed public access to registries detailing beneficial owners. Although it has a much wider scope than beneficial ownership in the fisheries sector, this ruling is likely to undermine progress in this area.

Financial Transparency Must be Prioritised

With climate change heightening geopolitical tensions around fisheries in certain regions and driving changes in patterns of convergence between IUU fishing and other crimes, this failure to act on the opacity and financial secrecy enabling IUU fishing must be addressed. This is particularly urgent given that IUU fishing relies heavily on the formal financial system, making it highly susceptible to concerted action by the anti-financial crime community. Given what is at stake and the need for effective deterrents, financial transparency should now be placed at the heart of efforts to tackle IUU fishing.

Source link

Foreign Ministries and Cyber Power: Implications of Artificial Intelligence

By
Guest Author
-
0
Studying Moscow’s Coercive Campaign Against Norway: The Bear is Awake


The field of cyber security is no stranger to hyperbole and scaremongering – including the doom rhetoric forecasting a ‘Cyber Pearl Harbour’ or ‘Cyber 9/11’. For AI, the equivalent would be debates about its existential risks that invoke Arnold Schwarzenegger’s serial portrayal of The Terminator. While both cyber security and AI share the burden of unhelpful baggage, they also share something more important: AI and cyber security are likely to become increasingly interdependent. States have long tried to mitigate the risks and embrace the opportunities of cyberspace. As they now play catch up in efforts to regulate and negotiate shared principles about how to use AI, states should ensure that their respective cyber diplomacy and AI diplomacy are not conducted in silos. They should be pursued as closely together as possible.

No state wants to be left behind in the race to secure strategic advantage in AI or cyberspace – although, realistically, some states are better placed than others to cultivate a domestic ecosystem supportive of AI innovation and to harness its operational benefits. While AI is far from being a new development in cyber security, it will nonetheless be increasingly integrated into both defensive and offensive operations in cyberspace. This will increase the speed and scale of engagements, raising questions about how to ensure adequate human comprehension and control – and how to constrain competition to reduce the risk of imprudent or escalatory uses of AI in cyberspace.

Cyber Diplomacy and Cyber Power

The interdependence of AI and cyber power (in short: the ability of a state to achieve its objectives in and through cyberspace) is a striking example of how contemporary trends in geopolitical competition have affected how we think about developments in science and emerging technology. This is not a new development. International discussions of responsible state behaviour in cyberspace and efforts to collaborate against cybercrime have been a formal part of the global agenda for 20 years. Through this process, states and non-state stakeholders (from the private sector to civil society) have wrestled with the darker side of the rise of the internet and digital technologies, discussing the threats posed by cyber-criminals and hostile states. The diplomatic process has had its ups and downs, but it has delivered an emerging agreement about the applicability of international law to cyberspace and the existence of a range of voluntary norms, rules and principles that should guide states’ behaviour therein. Many debates remain to be settled, such as those over the interpretation and implementation of existing norms, the merits of elaborating new norms, and the best institutional format for the next phase of global cyber diplomacy.

Foreign Ministries and Cyber Diplomacy

In the UK and other states, foreign ministries have become increasingly active in this agenda. At one level, it is unsurprising that the Diplomatic Service should be a leading institutional player in cyber diplomacy, but at another level it should be remembered that much of the substance of these diplomatic discussions has a bearing on operational activities that are the domain of a state’s armed forces and intelligence agencies. Consequently, the institutional landscape of cyber policy is somewhat crowded – particularly in those states that possess more ‘cyber power’, such as the UK. Different institutional actors will have different views about what a state’s policy should be, and relatedly, different equities at stake in the decision-making process.

Across four iterations of UK strategy (2009, 2011, 2016 and 2022), it has been evident that the UK has increased its investment in the diplomatic and foreign policy elements of cyber strategy. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) is active in global cyber negotiations and discussions, including in forums such as the UN and OSCE. It is engaged in funding and developing the cyber capacities of other states and regional bodies. It is also involved in the UK’s elaboration of the concept of Responsible, Democratic Cyber Power, which serves both as an underlying principle of how the UK approaches the use of cyber power, and as a trope of strategic communication as the UK tries to shape domestic and international debates about how states should organise themselves to exercise cyber power in a precise, proportionate and well-regulated fashion.

The role of foreign ministries in this process is multifaceted. In addition to leading the negotiating effort in diplomatic forums, they provide a window into the thinking of other states about how cyber capabilities should be used and regulated, and act as a source of reporting about foreign AI innovations (both scientific and in policy or regulation). Foreign ministries have long since lost their monopoly on managing relationships with other states – defence ministries, for example, have a clear need to maintain direct contact with their foreign counterparts – but there remains a coordinating role for foreign ministries to ensure that this patchwork of foreign ties is pursued coherently.

Foreign ministries need to be organised for effective performance, for example by creating departments for cyber and emerging technology policy. The FCDO has had a cyber policy department for over a decade, and it has grown significantly in that time, but there is a valid question for the future about whether more coherence could be established by merging the department with its counterpart focused on international technology policy. Similarly, beyond the policy branch, foreign ministries should improve the knowledge baseline for policy decisions by creating and resourcing cadres for research and analysis. For all foreign ministries increasing the size of their policy effort on AI and cyber power, a useful question to ask is what a sensible commensurate increase would look like in supporting functions like research. The risk of pursuing one without the other is that the institution gets less bang for its buck overall. If states are worried about geopolitical competition in AI and cyber power – and they clearly are worried – then there is a need for a systematic net assessment of developments in other states. This should be pursued collaboratively with allies and partners, but it is first necessary to look at domestic arrangements and determine whether they are fit for purpose.

Summit Meetings: Good or Bad?

Finally, a word about the UK’s intended hosting of a global summit for AI safety, announced by the prime minister on his recent visit to the US and scheduled for later this year. It is easy to be cynical or sceptical about such initiatives. Is the cost justified by the likely benefits; could the official bandwidth they consume be devoted to other, more productive things; or will heads of government grandstanding together project the image of substantive engagement, but lead to little in practice?

In fairness, these summits can have their place, so long as they are a productive part of a wider effort. They can signal that heads of government are interested, which can drive bureaucratic activity. Even if the attendance list is restricted to the most ‘likeminded’ states, this can still have value (a recent example is the US-led Summit for Democracy) and in the short term can actually be more productive, helping to coordinate a coalition of those states most willing to embrace the challenge of ensuring that the impact of emerging technologies does not undermine democracy, freedom and human rights. But preaching to the converted will only do so much. This is especially true when an alternative approach, such as China’s, is being marketed energetically to states already receptive to the message that new technologies of surveillance and control can further tip the balance between governments and citizens.

Conclusion

The global agenda of cyber diplomacy is already busy, with debate about norms of state behaviour in cyberspace and a new cybercrime treaty. Similarly, the UK proposal of a summit on AI safety is but one example of intensifying international efforts to address the impact of AI. The challenge for foreign ministries will be to ensure coherence between these two agendas, especially recognising the priority of understanding the implications of AI for cyber norms diplomacy. Foreign ministries need to organise themselves, coordinate effectively (domestically and with allies), and contribute to the process of understanding and shaping relevant developments in other states. The implications of AI and other emerging technologies for cyber power represent a significant new priority for diplomacy and foreign policy. Foreign ministries need to adapt to meet this challenge.

The views expressed in this Commentary are the author’s, and do not represent those of RUSI or any other institution.

Have an idea for a Commentary you’d like to write for us? Send a short pitch to [email protected] and we’ll get back to you if it fits into our research interests. Full guidelines for contributors can be found here.

Source link

Ukraine: Guterres ‘strongly condemns’ Russian attacks on Odesa and other ports

By
United Nations News
-
0
Ukraine: Guterres ‘strongly condemns’ Russian attacks on Odesa and other ports

In making its decision, Russia also withdrew safe passage guarantees for ships carrying grain and other foodstuffs navigating in the northwestern part of the Black Sea.

Over the past year, the Initiative has facilitated the export of more than 30 million tonnes of Ukrainian grain to global markets via three Black Sea ports, including Odesa.

Grain deal stalled

The Black Sea Initiative was agreed by Russia, Ukraine, Türkiye and the UN in Istanbul last July, along with a parallel accord between the UN and Russia on grain and fertilizer exports, known as the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU).

According to news reports, at least three people were killed during what was a third successive night of airstrikes on Wednesday into Thursday, targeting facilities in Ukrainian port cities.

At least 19 people were injured in Mykolaiv, a city close to the Black Sea, including a child, according to Ukrainian officials.

Head of communications for UN aid coordination office OCHA in Ukraine, Saviano Abreu, tweeted that the “horrific” attack on the city occurred right in the centre. Humanitarians are supporting families whose houses have been hit, and have provided emergency support including cash assistance. 

Russian contradiction

In a statement released by UN Spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric, UN chief António Guterres said the attacks “contradict” Russia’s commitments under the still active MoU, which states Russia “will facilitate the unimpeded export of food, sunflower oil and fertilizers from Ukrainian controlled Black Sea ports”.

“The Secretary-General also recalls that the destruction of civilian infrastructure may constitute a violation of international humanitarian law. These attacks are also having an impact well beyond Ukraine”, the statement continued.

Negative impact on prices

“We are already seeing the negative effect on global wheat and corn prices which hurts everyone, but especially vulnerable people in the Global South.”

Mr. Guterres said he would “not relent” in his bid to ensure Ukrainian and Russian food and fertilizer are available on international markets, linking this to ongoing efforts to combat global hunger and rising food prices worldwide.

Lifeline for world’s poorest

UN Resident Coordinator in Ukraine, Denise Brown, also condemned the attacks, saying she was horrified by the images coming from Odesa of damage and destruction.

“It is the second day in a row that this civilian port, a crucial lifeline for Ukraine and for the poorest people in the world who depend on Ukrainian grain, has been severely damaged in massive strikes.” she said in a statement. 

“This is inhumane and against international humanitarian law,” she added, before calling for an end to the assaults.

Source link

Cyber Resilience Act: MEPs back plan to boost digital products security

By
European Parliament
-
0
Cyber Resilience Act: MEPs back plan to boost digital products security
Photo by Towfiqu barbhuiya on Unsplash

New cyber resilience rules adopted on Wednesday will establish a uniform set of cybersecurity requirements for all digital products in the European Union.

The draft cyber resilience act approved by the Industry, Research and Energy Committee aims to ensure that products with digital features, e.g. phones or toys, are secure to use, resilient against cyber threats and provide enough information about their security properties.

MEPs propose more precise definitions, feasible timelines, and a fairer distribution of responsibilities. The draft rules put products into different lists based on their criticality and the level of cybersecurity risk they pose. MEPs suggest expanding this list with such product as identity management systems software, password managers, biometric readers, smart home assistants, smart watches and private security cameras. Products should also have security updates installed automatically and separately from functionality ones, MEPs add.

They also emphasise the importance of professional skills in the cybersecurity field, proposing education and training programmes, collaboration initiatives, and strategies for enhancing workforce mobility.

Quote

Lead MEP Nicola Danti (Renew, IT) said: “With ever-increasing interconnection, cybersecurity needs to become a priority for industry and consumers alike. Europe’s security in the digital domain is as strong as its weakest link. Thanks to the Cyber Resilience Act, hardware and software products will be more cyber secure, vulnerabilities will get fixed and cyber threats to our citizens will be minimised.”

Next steps

MEPs on the Industry Committee backed the draft cyber resilience act with 61 votes to 1, with 10 abstentions. They also voted to open negotiations with Council with 65 votes to 2, and 5 abstentions – a decision which will have to be greenlighted by the full House in a forthcoming plenary session.

Background

New technologies come with new risks, and the impact of cyber-attacks through digital products has increased dramatically in recent years. Consumers have fallen victim to security flaws linked to digital products such as baby monitors, robot-vacuum cleaners, Wi-Fi routers and alarm systems. For businesses, the importance of ensuring that digital products in the supply chain are secure has become pivotal, considering three in five vendors have already lost money due to product security gaps.

Serious Question: Is My Device Listening to Me?

By
Newsdesk
-
0
Serious Question: Is My Device Listening to Me?


The UK is truly a digitised nation. In 2022, Statista figures showed that only 13% of people in the UK didn’t own any smart home devices. And 98% of the UK population has a mobile phone. All this proves we have devices everywhere: in our pockets, in our homes, and in our workplace. However, many devices work by constantly recording the world around them. And for many of us, that is unsettling.

Cybersecurity - illustrative photo.

Cybersecurity – illustrative photo. Image credit: Kenny Eliason via Unsplash, free license

For instance, you might be chatting to a friend about something, then pop online on your phone. All the adverts on your browser are about that thing you were just chatting about. It can be weirdly unsettling when you speak about something and an advert for it appears 10 minutes later.

The UK public has realised something is afoot. A survey in 2021 found that 66% were aware of their phones listening to them.

But why are phones listening? Is it a cause for concern? And what can you do to stop your device from quietly listening to you? 

Why is my device listening?

The main way your smart devices are listening is for their ‘wake words’ like ‘Hey Siri’ and ‘Alexa’. This helps them deliver functionality to you, kicking into action when needed. The likes of Siri will also send snippets of your conversations to Apple to help improve the service.

The other reason is for marketing purposes. Search engines and websites track your browser history and cookies to serve up more tailored adverts while you use the internet. They do this because more well-targeted ads are more likely to result in a sale. Some devices can also listen out for and use your voice to target these adverts. 

Should I be worried?

Our phones don’t record us by mistake or illegally. If you have signed a user agreement with a tech company like Apple or Google, you will almost certainly have let them record you.

Now, whether that is a good or a bad thing depends on a few factors. Do you use these services? If not, then their recording could be an issue. Do you care about personalised ads? If not, then do you care about providing that data? And do you like sharing personal data with third parties in general? The eeriness of personalised content could be a factor here.

What can I do to improve my privacy?

If you don’t want your device to record you, there are several things you can do. First, you can add another layer of protection by using a virtual private network that will disguise your data.  But wait, are VPNs legal in the UK? Well, thankfully, they are. And as a result, they can be used to protect against things like location tracking and data monitoring. 

Next, visit the relevant settings in your device and turn off all settings related to your phone listening in. It can take a few minutes, but this is the best way to stop your phone from eavesdropping.

Do you care about phones listening in on your conversations? Were you aware of the practice to begin with?



Source link

Elon Musk – xAI Will Try to “Understand the Universe”

By
Newsdesk
-
0

Elon Musk revealed that his new artificial intelligence company, xAI, aims to “understand the universe.”

During a lengthy Twitter Spaces audio chat, Musk discussed his vision for xAI, touching on topics such as the evolution of Earth and the vulnerability of civilization. As a joke, he suggested that xAI’s mission could be described by a single sentence “what the hell is really going on?”

The billionaire and Tesla CEO established xAI after criticizing other companies like OpenAI and Google for developing AI technology without adequately considering the risks to humanity.

Musk expressed that xAI would focus on building a “good AGI” (artificial general intelligence), which refers to AI capable of problem-solving similar to humans.

In the Twitter Spaces session, which experienced a delayed start due to algorithm adjustments, Musk mentioned that xAI would collaborate closely with his other companies, Twitter and Tesla.

He revealed some technical details, for example, that public tweets would be used to train xAI’s AI models, and that there could be a potential collaboration with Tesla on developing AI software. Elon Musk emphasized the mutual benefit of such an ecosystem, as it could accelerate Tesla’s progress in self-driving capabilities.

Written by Alius Noreika

Source link

Winners of 2023 UN Human Rights Prize Announced

By
United Nations News
-
0
Winners of 2023 UN Human Rights Prize Announced

Established by the General Assembly in 1966, the Prize was awarded for the first time in 1968 on what is now Human Rights Day, 10 December, and it is awarded every five years for achievements in the field of human rights.

Previous recipients have included Jimmy Carter, Nelson Mandela, Dr. Denis Mukwege, Eleanor Roosevelt, Malala Yusafzai, and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

This year’s winners were the Human Rights Center “Viasna”, based in Belarus,  Julienne Lusenge from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Amman Center for Human Rights Studies from Jordan, Julio Pereyra from Uruguay and the Global Coalition of civil society organizations, Indigenous Peoples, social movements and local communities.

Award ceremony

The recipients of the Prize were chosen by a Special Committee from more than 400 nominations received from Member States, the UN system, and civil society. 

The Committee is chaired by the President of the General Assembly, and its members include the President of the Economic and Social Council, the President of the Human Rights Council, the Chair of the Commission on the Status of Women, and the Chair of the Advisory Committee of the Human Rights Council. 

The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) provided support to the special committee. 

“The winners’ dedication speaks to the universal nature of human rights at a critical time,” said Mr. Kőrösi.

The award ceremony for the 2023 Prize will take place at UN Headquarters in New York in December 2023, as part of activities to commemorate Human Rights Day. 

Defending human rights 

The members of the Special Committee conveyed their admiration for all civil society actors who with their work contribute to the promotion, protection, and advancement of human rights. 

They also acknowledged the important role played by human rights defenders and activists, praising them for their courage and dedication while strongly condemning any attempts to “silence and intimidate” them.

They expressed solidarity with those who are detained in retaliation for their work in defending human rights and pursuing the implementation of all the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, marking it’s 75th birthday this year.

Source link

Libya: Rights experts denounce discriminatory travel policy

By
United Nations News
-
0
Libya: Rights experts denounce discriminatory travel policy

Under the policy, all women and girls are mandated to fill out a detailed form providing personal information, reasons and previous history of traveling without a male guardian. Those who refuse to complete or submit the form are denied exit. 

“Not only is this policy discriminatory, but it also restricts the freedom of movement of women and girls, including students who leave the country to study abroad,” the experts said in a statement.

Rights defenders intimidated

The experts voiced their deep concern about the negative impact of the discriminatory procedure on the fundamental rights and freedoms of women and girls “in contradiction with Libya’s international and national obligations on non-discrimination, equality and the right to privacy.”

They were also concerned about reported attempts by the Libyan Internal Security Agency (ISA) to intimidate human rights defenders, including women, who have spoken out against these policies.

Appeal to authorities

The experts urged the authorities to withdraw this discriminatory requirement, and to prevent all intimidation, harassment and attacks against women and human rights defenders who have protested against the policy.

“The restriction marks a further erosion of the rights of women and girls in Libya and sends the wrong signal,” they said. “Women’s equality and dignity must be ensured.”

The experts who issued the statement were appointed by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

They are not UN staff and are not paid for their work.

Source link

1...201202203...1,550Page 202 of 1,550

© FRVS+MPCP 2022. The European Times® News is registered as an EU Trademark. All rights reserved. The European Times® and the logo of The European Times® are EU trademarks registered by FRVS+MPCP.

MADRID

Members/Partners of

GNS Press - The European Times

Google News

  

About Us

Popular Category

DISCLAIMER OPINIONS: The opinions of the authors or reproduced in the articles are the ones of those stating them and it is their own responsibility. Should you find any incorrections you can always contact the newsdesk to seek a correction or right of replay.

DISCLAIMER TRANSLATIONS: All articles in this site are published in English. The translated versions are done through an automated process known as neural translations. If in doubt, always refer to the original article. Thank you for understanding.

DISCLAIMER PHOTOS: We mostly used photos images that are readily available online, from free sources, or from the people promoting the news. If by any chance it happens that we have used one of your copyrighted photos, please do not hesitate to contact us and we will take it down without question. We do not make profits as this is a not for profit project to give voice to the voiceless while giving them a platform to be informed also of general news, and it is completely free.

Editor Picks