COVID-19

  • MALAYSIA: ‘Migrants are amongst the first to be victimised and discriminated during the pandemic’

    Adrian PereiCIVICUS speaks to Adrian Pereira, the Executive Director ofNorth South Initiative (NSI), about the situation of migrant workers in Malaysia amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

    NSI helps build advocacy and leadership capacities among migrants, refugees and stateless persons, both documented and undocumented, so they can claim their rights. It also monitors labour and immigration-related abuses by authorities, employers and local workers and ensures that migrant organisations are connected to a strong solidarity network and are able to cooperate with other civil society organisations (CSOs) and trade unions.

    There are estimated to be somewhere between three and six millionmigrant workers in Malaysia. Migrant workers are set up for exploitation by a combination of unscrupulous recruitment agents and employers, harsh immigration policies, unmonitored supply chains and a lack of enforcement of labour protections. They are subjected to passport confiscation, low pay in violation of minimum wage laws, poor living conditions, punishment by fines, high recruitment fees and debts to recruitment agencies and employers, forced labour, human trafficking and salary deductions. Areport on the ability of migrants and refugees to access civic freedoms, produced by CIVICUS and Solidarity Center in collaboration with NSI, showed that the rights to the freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression in Malaysia are severely restricted for these vulnerable minorities.

     

    What was the situation of migrant workers’ access to healthcare prior to the pandemic?

    Malaysia removed subsidies for migrant workers to access public healthcare in 2016. Given that migrants rely mostly on public medical services, this measure resulted in declining quality and access to healthcare by migrants, both documented and undocumented, as the high cost of private alternatives usually deters them from getting any healthcare. Despite migrants and their employers and agents paying billions of Malaysian Ringgit per year in levies, taxes and other payments, they are not getting their money’s worth in healthcare.

    Those who are undocumented are only able to access private healthcare, because if they try to access public healthcare, immigration authorities will be informed, and they will come to arrest them. Over the years, brutal enforcement by police, immigration and customs forces and the People’s Volunteer Corps towards undocumented migrants has made them even more fearful of seeking medical treatment.

    There are also cultural competency gaps between medical practitioners and migrants, which make it difficult for them to get proper healthcare. Domestic workers who don’t have days off and are locked indoors have an even more difficult time in accessing healthcare.

    One positive step in 2019 was the inclusion of documented migrants into the national social security system, ensuring much higher compensation and better healthcare in the event of work-related accidents and illnesses. But for non-work-related accidents and injuries, private insurance offers minimal coverage. 

    What additional challenges have migrant workers faced since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic?

    Many migrant workers, and especially undocumented and informal ones, have lost their source of income. As a result, they can’t pay for food, rent and medicines, unless they have tested positive for COVID-19, in which case their quarantine and care is covered by the government. Only migrants who provide government-sanctioned ‘essential services’ are able to work. But their safety really depends on whether the companies permitted to operate comply with rules set by the government. The rules are meant to ensure workers are safe from the risk of COVID-19 infection and can continue to work. But there is almost no one to monitor this consistently.

    The government has announced an economic stimulus package that sadly has marginalised migrant workers. There is a worker’s salary subsidy to ensure companies don’t have to retrench workers, but this does not apply to migrant workers. Previously, migrant workers were also excluded from the Workers Insurance Scheme under the national social security body, which would ensure a safety net for workers who were retrenched. The Movement Control Orders (MCOs) imposed by the government to restrict travel that came into force on 18 March have made it difficult for migrants to travel to access basic services, food, banking and other essentials. In Enhanced MCO areas, service providers can’t even enter. Informal sectors are sacking and abandoning the migrants who worked for them, particularly undocumented migrants and refugees. 

    Employers are forcing migrant employees to resign or take unpaid leave. Employers are taking advantage of the MCOs to not pay their workers. NSI received reports of at least two cases of unpaid salaries way before the MCOs were imposed. One had been unpaid since December 2019 and another since February 2020.

    There is also fearmongering going on, with fake messages and misinformation online putting migrants at risk of backlash from Malaysians. The government pledged not to arrest and detain migrants who come forward for COVID-19 testing. But there is still a lot of fear among migrants and hence many are not coming forward. Some sectors that are very economically aggressive are forcing the government to allow them to reopen so workers can go back to work. We have seen this in the Sabah state palm oil sector.

    The European Union (EU) is also putting both migrant and Malaysian workers at risk of forced labour by asking Malaysian personal protective equipment (PPE) manufacturers to ensure production continues during the pandemic. The EU has offered tax incentives to Malaysian companies to supply PPE. Further, small and medium enterprises that have been hiring undocumented workers for many years have abandoned their workers, claiming they are short on cash. 

    How have you and other CSOs responded to the situation?

    We are coaching migrant leaders to ensure their communities have access to networks that provide services and can provide accurate information about needs to those who are providing services. Some public networks, such as the ‘Care Mongering Malaysia’ group, are proving a platform for Malaysians to reach out to help migrants and refugees in need. This is an online platform that links those who need help with those who can afford to provide the service. Also, Sikh temples are providing groceries and packed lunches. 

    Other CSOs working hard on the ground to provide groceries include BERSIH2.0, Beyond Borders, Dapur Jalanan, Engage, Geutanyoe Foundation, HOPE, Liga Rakyat Demokratik, Malaysian Trades Union Congress, Our Journey, The Patani, Refuge for the Refugees, Tenaganita and also migrant and refugee community organisations.  Migrant workers can call them when they need assistance with food.

    We are forming a network to ensure services can be delivered in the long term, as we foresee the problems continuing for many months to come. Many migrant workers will remain and will need aid, so we are developing a supply chain to support them.

    We are ensuring migrants receive accurate information from global bodies such as the International Organization for Migration, United Nations (UN) Development Programme and UN Refugee Agency and also from the various government agencies related to health, labour, security and welfare. This includes providing information via infographics on counselling services and on health issues in different languages. 

    We are also fighting misinformation related to migrant workers and refugees. There has been a lot of fearmongering blaming them for the spread of the virus.

    We are also encouraging migrants to seek medical treatment if they are sick and monitoring employers who are taking advantage of the current situation and committing labour offences, particularly as the MCOs have partly restricted lawyers from providing legal representation and legal aid.

    Other CSOs are providing counselling, delivering groceries, doing fundraising, monitoring human trafficking, providing gender-sensitive and maternity-related services and catering to women’s needs.

    What further support does Malaysian civil society need at this time?

    We need cash to support migrants’ needs, including to pay for groceries, bills, rentals and safe repatriation home after the MCOs. We are also seeking funding opportunities because as long as the MCOs apply, we are unable to conduct physical meetings, and most fundraising is based on this. We also need legal aid services for those who are being retrenched unfairly and detained unjustly.

    What lessons have you learned so far from the pandemic?

    We have seen that the government has barely consulted CSOs before implementing policies and this is not in line with good governance principles. Also, there is overkill in punishing those who violate MCOs, including people who are forced to breach the MCOs due to livelihood issues. Further, the over-securitisation of migration over the years has now caused a backlash against migrants, who have been neglected.

    Migrants are amongst the first to be victimised and discriminated against during the pandemic as they are neglected and don’t have strong safety nets. A capitalist system that operates on the basis of mega global supply chains and mega businesses does not have a proper risk-management plan that ensures accountability and transparency. Malaysia also has a problem with statistics, as it has been doctoring the numbers of those in poverty and has failed to address the problems resulting from the huge number of undocumented workers due to the meddling of the deep state.

    The civic rights of migrants have been suspended under the MCOs and Enhanced MCOs, and this in turn has weakened their bargaining power to gain their rights. There has also not been enough cooperation between migrants’ countries of origin and Malaysia to ensure the safe repatriation of those who want to return home, which poses a high risk of infection for everyone. We have received reports that under the MCOs, migrants are forced to use irregular passages to travel home. Embassies have turned to Malaysians for assistance for their citizens.

    CSOs are also not as united as I had assumed in building consensus in dealing with the problems, as they have struggled to cope with this. At the same time, some Malaysians who may have been biased against migrants have, in this time of need, showed compassion and responded in solidarity to migrants’ struggles. As has become clear, in the long term, the economic contributions of migrants ended up benefitting everyone except migrants themselves.

    Civic space inMalaysia is rated as ‘obstructed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
    Get in touch with the North South Initiative through itswebsite and Facebook page, and follow@nsinitiative11 on Twitter.
  • MALAYSIA: ‘The government should have assisted refugees under the pandemic’

    Htoon Htoon OoCIVICUS speaks to Htoon Htoon Oo, a refugee and activist from Myanmar, currently based in Malaysia. In 2007, he was a chemistry student in East Yangon University and an activist who took part in what was described as the Saffron Revolution, a series of protests unleashed by a hike in fuel prices, which were harshly repressed. He was also active during Myanmar’s transition from a military dictatorship to a quasi-civilian government in 2010.

    Aware of being under state surveillance and fearing that his family members and loved ones would experience reprisals and harassment due to his activism, he fled Myanmar in 2011 and has lived as a refugee in Malaysia ever since.

     

    What is the situation of refugees in Malaysia?

    The life of Myanmar refugees in Malaysia continues to be difficult, as it involves various struggles and suffering. We often feel helpless, hopeless, and unprotected. As of May 2021, there were an estimated 179,570 refugees and asylum seekers registered with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) in Malaysia. The majority – a total of 154,840 – were from Myanmar, including 102,950 Rohingya people, 22,490 ethnic Chins, and 29,400 from other ethnic groups fleeing persecution or conflict-affected areas.

    Malaysia has not yet ratified the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. The absence of a legal framework for recognising refugees and asylum seekers has created problematic and exploitative conditions for refugees and asylum seekers because we lack formal rights to work, we do not have legal status, we do not benefit from any legal protection and we continue to remain at risk of arrest, detention, and refoulement.

    We also have limited civic freedoms. Although there are many different organisations of refugees from various backgrounds, when it comes to expressing our concerns and organising our struggles, the reality is that we are not able to do it freely. There is common fear among refugees regarding the consequences of speaking up about our struggle, expressing our concerns, and claiming our rights.

    For example, under the Peaceful Assembly Act, Section 4(a), the right to assemble peacefully is reserved exclusively for Malaysian citizens. Moreover, there are many laws in Malaysia that create a chilling effect for refugees who want to speak up, such as the Immigration Act, which criminalises undocumented migrants as well as refugees, given that we are not recognised by law. The Immigration Act also exposes refugees to severe forms of punishment, such as caning. The lack of recognition of refugees and asylum seekers in Malaysia exposes us to arrest, imprisonment, and various abuses.

    What additional challenges have refugees faced under the pandemic?

    Since the COVID-19 pandemic broke out in Malaysia in March 2020, refugees have faced several issues and struggles. The lockdown, known as the Movement Control Order (MCO), which was applied to the whole nation, has had a huge impact on refugees.

    Refugees cannot work under Malaysian law, but some do seek informal work to survive. Under the pandemic, we have seen cases of employers forcing refugees to work for salaries below the normal wage or to take unpaid leave or resign just because of their refugee status. Many refugees lost their jobs due to the pandemic. There is nothing to protect us from these abuses.

    We also fear for our safety during the pandemic because there have been several cases of refugees being targeted by the police and immigration officers due to a lack of clear policies and awareness among law enforcement officials on what a refugee is. Some refugees were fined by the police, and some were even detained at police stations for several days.

    Some people also label us as illegal immigrants even if we hold complete and authentic UNHCR refugee cards or documents.

    Most of the refugees who face these struggles are also dealing with depression and are mentally exhausted through thinking of ways just to survive and remain safe.

    Have refugees received any support from the Malaysian government or the UNHCR during the pandemic?

    Refugees have received no support from the Malaysian government; rather we experienced more raids and increasing restrictions. This is the opposite of what should have happened: they should have provided us with access to information on COVID-19 treatment and testing and there should have been other support programmes for refugees during the pandemic.

    Instead, in May 2020, Malaysia’s immigration department and police force carried out immigration raids in Kuala Lumpur. While those registered with the UNHCR were largely spared arrest, unregistered asylum seekers were swept up along with undocumented migrant workers. Some were also stuck in areas under strict lockdown surrounded by barbed wire, with residents forbidden from leaving their homes, which made it very difficult. Many of us have not recovered from this.

    There has also been a wave of online hate speech towards refugees, and particularly towards Rohingya people, during the pandemic, accompanied by government announcements and policies that are hostile towards migrants and refugees.

    The UNHCR sent direct messages to refugees whose documents expired informing them that they would remain valid until the UNHCR could resume its normal operations, which were disrupted by the pandemic. This, however, made no difference to law enforcement, and many people have been fined and arrested.

    What is the status of refugees regarding access to the COVID-19 vaccine?

    The Malaysian government has encouraged refugees to come forward to register for vaccination but has not provided clear information, and the existing systems are not accessible for refugees.

    For example, there is a requirement for specific documents to register for vaccines. The system requires refugees and asylum seekers to input an ID card or passport number, two documents that we do not have access to.

    The system should be more inclusive of all persons living in Malaysia, including refugees, asylum seekers, and undocumented migrants because vaccinations should be the first barrier against the creation of COVID-19 clusters. Arresting us will only make things worse because fatal clusters are known to have been formed in detention centres. The criminalisation of immigration is at the root of this problem.

    What are the demands of refugee communities towards the Malaysian government and the international community?

    We would like the Malaysian government to raise public awareness on the status of refugees as refugees, rather than as illegal immigrants, ‘risk’ groups or criminals. There has been a negative perception of refugees as only benefiting from society and not contributing to it, which is false.

    In reality, we want to contribute to Malaysia in every way that we can. We urge the Malaysian government to give refugees legal access to work and to acknowledge their legal status. We are currently unable to find formal work, and lack of recognition exposes us to exploitation. We hope the government will raise awareness of the true reasons why refugees are here.

    I hope that the government can work hand in hand with the UNHCR and civil society to settle refugee issues in more appropriate and effective ways and not deport any Myanmar detainees back to Myanmar, which is currently under a military regime. Instead, we should find solutions such as a resettlement programme. There should also be clear policies and information on vaccines accessible to all refugees.

    Civic space inMalaysiais rated as ‘obstructed’by theCIVICUS Monitor.
  • Malaysia: Authorities reverting to repressive tactics of former governments to throttle expression online
  • Malaysia: End harassment and intimidation of media workers and critics

    Joint Statement with Amnesty International and the International Commission of Jurists

    The Malaysian authorities must immediately put an end to their increasing attacks on freedom of expression, especially the media, international non-governmental organisations Amnesty International, CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) said today. Laws incompatible with international human rights law and standards, including the Sedition Act 1948 and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA) 1998, are being used to limit free speech and press freedom and should be repealed by the legislature.

    In the latest move in the ongoing clampdown on criticism and other expression, authorities have targeted those involved in making the documentary “Locked Up in Malaysia’s Lockdown,” by news broadcaster Al Jazeera and its 101 East series – which reported on the authorities’ arrests of migrant workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Al-Jazeera is being investigated for sedition and defamation, and has also been accused of breaching the Communications and Multimedia Act by the Malaysian authorities.

    On 3 July 2020, Al Jazeera on its 101 East Stream published a documentary that investigated the arrests, detention, and ill-treatment of refugees and undocumented migrant workers during the outbreak of COVID-19 in Malaysia. The documentary highlighted raids conducted by authorities; the inhumane conditions of detention; and the situation of migrant workers who fear arrest. Those detained were found to be held in cramped facilities, while migrant workers at risk of detention suffered from a severe lack of adequate food. The documentary also highlighted the chilling effect the government crackdown has had on the migrant worker community, who fear for their lives and safety.

    Rather than addressing the concerns raised in the documentary, the government has instead sought to question the reporters involved, and pursue migrant workers who spoke with Al Jazeera. By initiating a public campaign against migrants and refugees and publishing personal details of the migrant workers who were featured in the report, the authorities have also placed the lives and safety of those interviewed in jeopardy.

    The government’s subsequent threats to revoke the visas of foreign workers appears intended to intimidate other migrant workers from speaking up about human rights violations, including mistreatment. These actions have contributed to a worrying rise in intolerance towards freedom of expression, including critical views.

    Amnesty International, CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation, and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) consider these actions as forms of harassment and intimidation of the media, migrant workers, and others exercising their right to freedom of expression, including criticism or dissent.

    The use of the Sedition Act 1948, Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act, and criminal investigations against the media set a dangerous precedent and are incompatible with international law and standards. These laws place restrictions on the exercise of freedom of expression that are overly broad, unnecessary and disproportionate, and inconsistent with rule of law and human rights principles.

    We reiterate their our previous calls on the Government of Malaysia to abolish both laws, which have historically been used to silence voices of those challenging government policy.

    Background

    Since the COVID-19 pandemic emerged earlier this year, the Malaysian government has launched a crackdown on refugees, asylum-seekers and migrant workers, carrying out a series of raids on settlements in Kuala Lumpur and Selangor. Most notably, raids were carried out as Labour Day operations on 1 May 2020, but also continued afterwards.

    In response to these raids, the Office of the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights (OHCHR) denounced the crackdowns on migrant workers and journalists on 21 May. Migrant workers fear for their safety and there have been reports of suicide amongst them.

    Amid growing concerns about the crackdown, the government has increasingly sought to silence criticism.

    On 7 July, refugee aid worker Heidy Quah was questioned by police for posting a statement on the raids and the treatment of migrant and refugee children on social media. Her lawyer confirmed that she is being investigated under the Penal Code for criminal defamation and the Communications and Multimedia Act for the ‘improper use of network facilities or network service’.

    Since the Perikatan Nasional government assumed power, numerous investigations have been launched against individuals who have criticized government actions. Since February 2020, a journalist has been investigated by police for reporting on immigration raids; a member of parliament was investigated for criticising the May parliamentary session for not permitting debates; and a large number of ordinary Malaysians have been convicted for a variety of social media postings, including for criticising the enforcement of quarantine orders under the Movement Control Order (MCO).

    In another recent attack on media freedom, on 2 July 2020, contempt of court charges were filed against Steven Gan, editor-in-chief of online news outlet Malaysiakini, over comments that were posted by readers that were allegedly critical of the judiciary. The Federal Court will next hear the case on 13 July. If convicted, Gan faces an unlimited prison sentence or fine.

    Civic space in Malaysia is rated as Obstructed by the CIVICUS Monitor
  • Malaysia: Fundamental freedoms in decline under Perikatan Nasional government

    Joint research report on the state of civic freedoms in Malaysia

    The Perikatan Nasional government has undermined and obstructed the exercise of fundamental freedoms during its first twelve months in power, said ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS in a new report published today. The government has not only failed to reform or repeal laws that restrict the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association but has initiated baseless criminal proceedings against government critics, human rights defenders, journalists, and individuals expressing critical opinions.

    The report, “Rights in Reverse: One year under the Perikatan Nasional government in Malaysia”, highlights the Perikatan Nasional government’s record during its first year in power against its obligation to respect, protect, and fulfil the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association. The report highlights the government’s sustained use of repressive laws and provisions to silence dissent amid a global pandemic, when press freedom and civil society is needed more than ever to ensure reliable information and to hold the state accountable.

    “The Perikatan Nasional government has been extremely secretive about its legislative agenda but has been crystal clear about its intention to continue using repressive laws to target critics and dissenters,” said Nalini Elumalai, ARTICLE 19’s Malaysia Programme Officer. “A healthy environment for public discourse cannot be achieved until dissenting and unpopular opinions are respected and protected instead of silenced.”

    Over the past year, authorities have aggressively applied the Sedition Act 1948 and Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA) to investigate, arrest, charge, and convict individuals who have criticized government officials or Malaysian royalty, or who have shared opinions about sensitive issues such as race and religion. Between March 2020 and February 2021, ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS recorded 66 cases involving 77 individuals who have been investigated or charged under the two laws because of their exercise of the right to freedom of expression. Over this period, at least 12 people were convicted under the CMA.

    Press freedom has also declined sharply during the Perikatan Nasional government’s first year in power. This trend was highlighted by Malaysiakini’s conviction on contempt of court charges in relation to third-party comments made on its website, the unprecedented witch-hunt against Al Jazeera journalists investigating the treatment of migrants workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the targeting of journalists reporting on the actions and statements of government officials. The harassment and intimidation of journalists further demonstrates the shrinking space for free and independent media in Malaysia.

    In addition to journalists, the authorities have harassed, investigated, and arbitrarily detained human rights defenders, peaceful protesters, women’s rights activists, and union leaders in an effort to silence civil society voices.

    The legal framework governing the exercise of freedom of assembly and association remains highly restrictive and excessively burdensome.

    The Peaceful Assembly Act falls shorts of international law and standards and denies the right to protest to children and non-citizens. It also fails to allow for spontaneous assemblies. The last year saw peaceful protesters being investigated and arrested, including health workers protesting their lack of access to adequate personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    The Societies Act has continued to stand in the way of enjoyment of the right to freedom of association, which is critical in a democracy. The Registrar of Societies has excessive powers and has erected barriers to registration for new opposition political parties such as Muda and Pejuang and civil society groups while simultaneously fast-tracking the registration of the Perikatan Nasional.

    “The Perikatan government has attempted to silence peaceful protesters and impede the formation of political parties to keep itself in power,” said Josef Benedict, CIVICUS Researcher. “Its attempt to join the Human Rights Council cannot be taken seriously unless it takes immediate steps to remove undue restrictions on assembly and association,” Benedict added.

    ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS urge the Malaysian government to undertake a comprehensive and inclusive process of legislative and institutional reform in order to promote and protect fundamental rights and freedoms. To this end, authorities must ensure that all processes are fully transparent and facilitate full and effective participation of all concerned stakeholders, including civil society.

    Malaysia’s reform process must be informed by relevant international human rights standards. The Perikatan National government should take concrete steps towards the ratification of core human rights treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

    For further information:

    More information

    The space for civil society in Malaysia is rated as ‘Obstructed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor, an online platform that tracks civic space in every country. An Obstructed rating for civic space means that democratic freedoms – such as the freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association – face a combination of legal and practical constraints in Malaysia.
  • Malaysia: New report on the state of fundamental freedoms under the Perikatan Nasional government

    Joint research report on the state of civic freedoms in Malaysia

    The Perikatan Nasional government has undermined and obstructed the exercise of fundamental freedoms during its first twelve months in power, said ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS in a new report published today. The government has not only failed to reform or repeal laws that restrict the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association but has initiated baseless criminal proceedings against government critics, human rights defenders, journalists, and individuals expressing critical opinions.

    The report, “Rights in Reverse: One year under the Perikatan Nasional government in Malaysia”, highlights the Perikatan Nasional government’s record during its first year in power against its obligation to respect, protect, and fulfil the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association. The report highlights the government’s sustained use of repressive laws and provisions to silence dissent amid a global pandemic, when press freedom and civil society is needed more than ever to ensure reliable information and to hold the state accountable.

    “The Perikatan Nasional government has been extremely secretive about its legislative agenda but has been crystal clear about its intention to continue using repressive laws to target critics and dissenters,” said Nalini Elumalai, ARTICLE 19’s Malaysia Programme Officer. “A healthy environment for public discourse cannot be achieved until dissenting and unpopular opinions are respected and protected instead of silenced.”

    Over the past year, authorities have aggressively applied the Sedition Act 1948 and Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA) to investigate, arrest, charge, and convict individuals who have criticized government officials or Malaysian royalty, or who have shared opinions about sensitive issues such as race and religion. Between March 2020 and February 2021, ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS recorded 66 cases involving 77 individuals who have been investigated or charged under the two laws because of their exercise of the right to freedom of expression. Over this period, at least 12 people were convicted under the CMA.

    Press freedom has also declined sharply during the Perikatan Nasional government’s first year in power. This trend was highlighted by Malaysiakini’s conviction on contempt of court charges in relation to third-party comments made on its website, the unprecedented witch-hunt against Al Jazeera journalists investigating the treatment of migrants workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the targeting of journalists reporting on the actions and statements of government officials. The harassment and intimidation of journalists further demonstrates the shrinking space for free and independent media in Malaysia.

    In addition to journalists, the authorities have harassed, investigated, and arbitrarily detained human rights defenders, peaceful protesters, women’s rights activists, and union leaders in an effort to silence civil society voices.

    The legal framework governing the exercise of freedom of assembly and association remains highly restrictive and excessively burdensome.

    The Peaceful Assembly Act falls shorts of international law and standards and denies the right to protest to children and non-citizens. It also fails to allow for spontaneous assemblies. The last year saw peaceful protesters being investigated and arrested, including health workers protesting their lack of access to adequate personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    The Societies Act has continued to stand in the way of enjoyment of the right to freedom of association, which is critical in a democracy. The Registrar of Societies has excessive powers and has erected barriers to registration for new opposition political parties such as Muda and Pejuang and civil society groups while simultaneously fast-tracking the registration of the Perikatan Nasional.

    “The Perikatan government has attempted to silence peaceful protesters and impede the formation of political parties to keep itself in power,” said Josef Benedict, CIVICUS Researcher. “Its attempt to join the Human Rights Council cannot be taken seriously unless it takes immediate steps to remove undue restrictions on assembly and association,” Benedict added.

    ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS urge the Malaysian government to undertake a comprehensive and inclusive process of legislative and institutional reform in order to promote and protect fundamental rights and freedoms. To this end, authorities must ensure that all processes are fully transparent and facilitate full and effective participation of all concerned stakeholders, including civil society.

    Malaysia’s reform process must be informed by relevant international human rights standards. The Perikatan National government should take concrete steps towards the ratification of core human rights treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

    For further information:

    More information

    The space for civil society in Malaysia is rated as ‘Obstructed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor, an online platform that tracks civic space in every country. An Obstructed rating for civic space means that democratic freedoms – such as the freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association – face a combination of legal and practical constraints in Malaysia.
  • MALDIVES: ‘We have come a long way, but more needs to be done to further open up civic space’
    SaafathCIVICUS speaks about the situation of women’s rights in Maldives with Safaath Ahmed Zahir, founder and president of Women & Democracy (W&D). 
     
    Founded in 2016, W&D is a civil society organisation (CSO) that promotes women’s economic and political participation and good democratic governance in the Maldives through research, advocacy and awareness-raising activities. 
     
    What led you to become an activist and found a women’s rights CSO?
     Growing up in Maldives, a small island developing nation, the disparities between men and women became evident to me. I came from a majority-women family and witnessed the personal upheavals that my mother endured and how much my family battled for my education. Returning home after studying abroad was an eye-opener for me. In interviewing for a job, I experienced first-hand the deep-rooted patriarchal culture and the double standards women face on a daily basis. So I decided to put my education to good use: to push for women’s rights and empowerment in my country.

    I first played a role in creating Women on Boards, a CSO promoting gender diversity in the workplace. This inspired me to try to contribute further to building the organisational infrastructure and community to support women’s economic and political participation in Maldives. The organisation I founded, W&D, is now one of the most prominent in Maldives, with over 300 members, 200 of them aged between 18 and 29.

    What are the main women’s rights challenges in Maldives?

    Maldives ranked 106 out of 144 nations in the World Economic Forum’s 2017 Global Gender Gap Report. Women are marginalised in the political sphere due to institutional barriers, discriminatory cultural practices and social norms. Despite being roughly half of the population, having a 98 per cent literacy rate and actively participating in political parties, in 2009 only 6.5 of members of parliament were women. The proportion fell to 5.9 per cent in 2013, and again to 4.6 per cent in 2019. Currently, only four out of 87 parliamentarians are women, and few women hold senior public sector roles.

    With the passing of the Decentralisation Act, which allocates 33 per cent of local council seats to women, there has been some progress in local governance. The Maldives’ women development committees are an important platform for women to enter into politics and to participate in the decision-making process at local and national levels. But many barriers still limit their fulfilment of their mandate. They should be empowered to achieve true decentralisation.

    Women continue to take on the burden of childcare and domestic chores, which makes it difficult for women to engage in economic activities on a par with men. Female labour force participation in Maldives is higher than in other South Asian countries, but women tend to be clustered in low-growth sectors and in lower-paying positions, and they earn less than men. While tourism is the lifeblood of our economy, women make up only seven per cent of the tourism labour force.

    Women’s entrepreneurship is generally underdeveloped, and women’s economic contribution tends to be rendered invisible, particularly in major sectors such as tourism, fisheries, construction and wholesale and retail trading. Gendered economic inequalities were exacerbated under the pandemic, reversing what little progress had been made over previous years.

    Gender-based violence also remains an entrenched problem. One in three women aged between 15 and 49 have experienced physical or sexual violence at some point in their lives. There is a great need for more and better infrastructure to support survivors.

    In sum, a clear female disadvantage persists. Regulatory institutions must be strengthened to solidify existing gender equality gains and mitigate gender inequalities.

    How is civil society in general, and W&D in particular, working to address these challenges?

    Women’s rights CSOs have been working to address these challenges for several years, through capacity development workshops, advocacy campaigns, movement-building and creating opportunities for women and girls.

    Six years on from its founding, W&D has become a leading CSO working to protect the rights and improve the lives of women. We particularly advocate for women’s safety, economic and political leadership and for inclusive democratic governance.

    Since 2018, we have conducted an annual capacity development programme to advance women’s leadership and political empowerment in partnership with the International Republican Institute. In three years, more than 680 women aspiring to public office and political leadership have taken part in our training activities. In the 2021 elections for local councils and women’s development committees, 83 women who successfully completed our training were elected.

    During the pandemic, we launched a rapid response programme for vulnerable women and girls. In response to the dramatic increase in reports of domestic abuse, we established a domestic violence and mental wellness helpline to help women seek the assistance of the relevant authorities, undertake safety planning and connect them with wellbeing resources. We provided survivors with psychosocial counselling and referred the most urgent cases to emergency shelters or other safe spaces. With a grant from the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust (QCT) we were able to assist 130 women.

    Also with QCT support, we worked to improve access to menstrual materials for vulnerable women and girls. Approximately 10,500 sanitary materials were distributed as part of our rapid response programme. We have just received additional support to continue our rapid response programme. We expect to assist at least 240 more women and girls within the next eight months.

    Additionally, in partnership with the Commonwealth Foundation we have hosted multi-stakeholder discussions and consultations with vulnerable populations, relevant government bodies and CSOs to offer policy reforms to address the needs of the most vulnerable.

    This year we implemented a project to help strengthen the capacity of CSOs and community-based organisations working towards women’s empowerment and social development in Maldives. We brought together more than 160 people from various organisations.

    How has civil society in Maldives joined the recent global mobilisation wave against gender-based violence?

    Over the past seven years there have been many street mobilisations, mainly condemning rape and demanding justice for sexual crimes against women and girls and children in Maldives. Protection gaps in rape laws and barriers to accessing justice have perpetuated the prevalence of sexual violence and the lack of justice for survivors. The dire state of women’s safety in Maldives was highlighted by the 2016 Demographic Health Survey conducted by the Ministry of Health, which showed that one in every four women in relationships had faced physical or sexual violence from an intimate partner in their lifetime. In recent years, the Maldivian community has become more outspoken on the issue, particularly amidst the #MeToo movement, where a lot of Maldivian women came forward with their experiences.

    Throughout 2020 and 2021, there were multiple street mobilisations spurred by cases of sexual violence and injustice. In early 2020, following a case of sexual abuse of a two-year-old girl by her relatives, outraged citizens protested against rape and urged the government to protect children from predators. The authorities again came under criticism in mid-2020 after a foreign woman was sexually assaulted and the suspects were released from custody, with reports soon following that one of them was in a position of influence. People gathered outside parliament to protest against rape and impunity.

    Following the exacerbating effects of the pandemic on violence and abuse against women and girls, protesters rallied again in 2021 The government has taken steps to address these problems. It ratified the First Amendment to the Sexual Offences Act to improve the definition of rape and strengthen investigations, including by removing burdensome evidence requirements. In 2021, it also criminalised marital rape, marking a significant milestone for the women’s rights movement. But there is still a lot of progress to be made in combating the violence and abuse faced by women and children.

    How has the space for civil society action evolved over the past few years?

    As a relatively new democracy, the Maldives has taken significant steps towards ensuring civic space freedoms, but there is still a lot of room for improvement.

    Following the November 2018 elections, Maldives has experienced legislative reforms and a relative opening up of civic space. A commission was established to probe unresolved disappearances. Maldives drastically improved its position in the World Press Freedom Index, moving from 142 to 87 out of 180 countries. This was made possible by reforms such as the repeal of the 2016 defamation law.

    While Maldives has come a long way since its first democratic election back in 2008, more needs to be done to further open up civic space. Over the years, human rights defenders have been targeted and subjected to verbal attacks, including hate speech and death threats, while women activists have faced online vilification and threats due to their work for women’s rights.

    CSOs are also under pressure from extremists and hate groups, whose influence in limiting the social and cultural lives and roles of women has persisted. There have been instances of religious scholars advocating for girl child marriage and female genital mutilation, and attempts to suppress women advocates who speak out against these grave violations of women’s rights. Women human rights defenders are specifically targeted and face additional and gender-specific challenges, including threats of sexual violence and rape.

    What kind of international support does the Maldives’ women’s rights movement need?

    We need the continued support of international partners and collaborators to maintain and advance our work to empower women. As our movement is mainly composed of CSOs, we rely on the generosity of international organisations that identify with our mission to be able to continue to run the projects that are making a difference in Maldives.

    We also need continued opportunities for dialogue and collaboration with the international community. The exchange of ideas and information among countries and cultures is inspiring and empowering for women and girls in Maldives, particularly in the areas of business and politics.

    International support for Maldivian civic space also plays a significant role in furthering women’s empowerment. This is largely achieved by developing the skill sets of CSOs through workshops and programmes run by our international partners and collaborators.

    Vocal support from the international community for the Maldives women’s rights movement is also crucial. While we have faced obstacles, CSOs in Maldives have persevered in promoting women’s rights and we will continue to do so alongside our international partners and supporters.

    Civic space in Maldives is rated ‘obstructed’by the CIVICUS Monitor.

    Get in touch with Women & Democracy through its website or Facebook page, and follow @wdmaldives on Twitter.
  • Mandela Day: Nearly 200 rights organisations call for release of activists as part of #StandAsMyWitness campaign
    • 197 human rights organisations sign letter calling on states to end the imprisonment and harassment of human rights defenders
    • States urged to stop new arrests and detentions of defenders, noting heightened risk during COVID-19
    • #StandAsMyWitness campaign launches on Nelson Mandela Day 18 July, featuring human rights defenders from around the world
  • MÉXICO: ‘Las violencias contra las mujeres son una pandemia histórica’

    CIVICUS conversa conWendy Figueroa, directora de la Red Nacional de Refugios, una organización de la sociedad civil (OSC) mexicana con más de 20 años de labor ininterrumpida. La Red incluye 69 espacios de prevención, atención y protección de víctimas de violencia familiar y de género en todo el país. Trabaja con un enfoque multidisciplinario e intersectorial, con perspectiva de género, derechos humanos y multiculturalidad. Se enfoca en la incidencia en política pública, la visibilización de la problemática mediante campañas y presencia en los medios de comunicación y la provisión de atención integral especializada y gratuita para las mujeres y sus hijos e hijas víctimas de violencia familiar y de género.

    Wendy Figueroa

    ¿Cómo ha evolucionado la violencia de género durante la pandemia del COVID-19?

    En México las violencias contra las mujeres son una pandemia histórica. No nacieron con el COVID-19; lo que hizo la pandemia fue evidenciar y profundizar la situación de violencia contra las mujeres durante el confinamiento. Las medidas del “quédate en casa”, adoptadas para mitigar el COVID-19, han dejado a cientos de mujeres en una situación de mayor riesgo y vulnerabilidad. La violencia de género también se ha magnificado durante la pandemia justamente porque en el marco del confinamiento las mujeres experimentaron una sobrecarga en materia de cuidados, labores domésticas y asunción de responsabilidades adicionales para optimizar los recursos disponibles, todo ello bajo la presión del agresor que se encuentra encerrado con ellas.

    ¿Cómo ha respondido la Red Nacional?

    Hemos reforzado las acciones e intervenciones que desarrollamos desde hace muchos años. Lo que caracteriza al trabajo de la Red Nacional de Refugios es que, si bien nuestra labor ha sido constante, nuestros abordajes para prevenir, atender y eliminar las violencias contra las mujeres, niños y niñas se han ido adaptando y enriqueciendo con el tiempo. Estos enfoques se actualizan según las necesidades de mujeres, niños y niñas. De modo que nuestras respuestas durante el período de confinamiento se enriquecieron y fortalecieron en varios sentidos. 

    En primer lugar, la Red tiene una línea de atención telefónica que opera las 24 horas del día todo el año, y también da intervención a través de las redes sociales. Estas han seguido fortaleciendo, aumentando el número de profesionales que brindan atención en estos dos espacios de comunicación con las mujeres. También implementamos un número de WhatsApp ya que hemos visto que, a mayor tiempo de confinamiento, disminuyen las posibilidades de las mujeres que experimentan violencias de contactarse con el exterior. Los mensajes de texto y las redes sociales han sido un vehículo sumamente importante para que las mujeres puedan mandarnos un mensaje en el momento en que encuentren la oportunidad.

    En muchos casos, estos mensajes han derivado en rescates. En el marco del confinamiento, las mujeres han aprovechado para salir la primera oportunidad en que el agresor no estuviera en casa, de modo que los rescates se han incrementado notablemente. En tan sólo dos meses hicimos 19 rescates, en comparación con los mismos meses de 2019, cuando hicimos alrededor de un rescate por mes. Para lograrlo hemos tenido que actuar creativamente y establecimos alianzas con algunas empresas privadas, tales como Avon y Uber, para la logística y los traslados.

    En segundo lugar, nuestras campañas de información, sensibilización y prevención han apuntado a tres momentos que atraviesan las mujeres en situación de violencia, de modo de proporcionar algunas estrategias de qué hacer antes, durante y después del evento de violencia. También compartimos estrategias para disminuir las situaciones de riesgo con los niños y las niñas dentro del hogar y establecer planes de seguridad. Hemos hecho una campaña incluyente y multicultural, con mensajes en lengua de señas para mujeres sordas y mensajes en las lenguas náhuatl, zapoteca y maya para mujeres indígenas.

    Dado que el COVID-19 profundiza y visibiliza discriminaciones y desigualdades preexistentes y que las mujeres están en una situación de mayor vulnerabilidad, también hemos preparado material para la sociedad en general. Fomentamos en la ciudadanía la formación de redes de apoyo solidarias que permitan visibilizar las violencias contra mujeres, niños y niñas, de modo que la gente pueda denunciar situaciones de violencia y participar de la construcción de una cultura de tolerancia cero.

    Tercero, hemos desarrollado la campaña “Confinamiento sin violencia”, también dirigida al gobierno, subrayando la necesidad y la urgencia de políticas públicas transversales y acompañadas de recursos presupuestarios, para atender las secuelas e impactos de la pandemia en las mujeres, con un enfoque de género, derechos humanos y multiculturalidad. Cuando se levante la cuarentena, estas políticas deben garantizar el acceso a la justicia, a los servicios de salud y a la compensación económica, entre otros derechos. 

    Cuarto, hemos realizado acciones puntuales dentro de los espacios de refugio, casas de emergencia, casas de transición y centros externos que integran la Red mediante la implementación de protocolos para mitigar el riesgo del contagio del COVID-19. Hemos aplicado la creatividad al uso de diversas plataformas digitales para continuar con el proceso integral de las mujeres que son atendidas en nuestros servicios. Hemos escalonado los horarios dentro de los refugios e implementado cuartos de cuarentena para continuar permitiendo el acceso de las mujeres, niños y niñas que lo requieren sin obstáculo o discriminación a causa del coronavirus, ya que para nosotras es sumamente importante poner a los derechos humanos en el centro de nuestras acciones.

    Estamos buscando financiamiento internacional y de empresas privadas para poder fortalecer la red de casas de emergencia y casas de transición. Las casas de emergencia son un paso previo al refugio y actualmente los estamos usando para mitigar el contagio del COVID-19 en los refugios: así, en vez de durar tres días, las estadías en casas de emergencia ahora duran 14 días, que es el tiempo de la cuarentena. Las casas de transición, por su parte, son sumamente importantes son el espacio disponible para las mujeres que salen del refugio y no cuentan con una vivienda o redes de apoyo sólidas. En esto espacios de transición ponen en marcha el proyecto que desarrollaron en el refugio y de a poco van transitando hacia la independencia. A causa de los impactos económicos del COVID-19, sin embargo, los acuerdos de empleo que teníamos para estas mujeres han sido cancelados. Pero las casas de transición permiten a las mujeres continuar con su proceso y evitan la frustración y la revictimización.

    ¿Han enfrentado restricciones adicionales de la libertad para organizarse, expresarse y movilizarse durante la pandemia?

    En términos generales, por supuesto que ha habido una limitación de movilidad a raíz de la campaña del “Quédate en casa”. En respuesta a ello, hemos tramitado buena parte de la atención por vía telefónica y a través de las redes sociales. Pero no hemos dejado de lado la atención presencial: hay algunas ciudades donde no hay ninguna alternativa disponible al centro de atención externa de la OSC local que integra la Red Nacional, y en esos casos hemos seguido operando presencialmente, tomando todos los recaudos para disminuir el riesgo de contagio. También seguimos operando y dando atención presencial, en los casos en que resulta necesario, en todos los espacios de protección: casas de emergencia, refugios y casas de transición. Y seguimos movilizándonos cuando el caso lo requiere.

    El derecho de reunión está limitado, pero no está prohibido que ante feminicidios y otras violaciones de derechos realicemos acciones conforme a nuestro modelo y en función de nuestros principios rectores, que son los derechos humanos y la vida de las mujeres. Hemos implementado estrategias creativas y nos hemos organizado para seguir con las indicaciones de limitar la movilidad y no estar afuera de casa cuando esto sea posible, pero manteniendo en el centro de nuestras acciones las necesidades de las familias que atendemos.

    ¿Cómo se ha adaptado el movimiento feminista al pasar de las protestas masivas al aislamiento social?

    Hemos transformado nuestras formas de protestar, nuestras formas de alzar las voces, de unirnos desde la sororidad en busca de justicia, igualdad sustantiva y respeto de todos los derechos para todas las mujeres, niñas y niños. Hemos utilizado las plataformas digitales y la tecnología para seguir comunicándonos, enredándonos, proponiendo acciones. Los movimientos feministas no se quedaron en silencio cuando llegó el COVID-19: a través de los medios y plataformas digitales hemos realizado conversatorios, webinarios, reuniones de acompañamiento y de sororidad, e incluso trueques feministas para contribuir a la economía de las compañeras y ofrecer nuestros servicios profesionales como psicólogas, médicas o abogadas en las redes sociales.

    También estamos haciendo pronunciamientos. Recientemente desde la Red Nacional de Refugios, junto con otros 42 grupos feministas, hicimos un video que acompaña a una carta con más de 6.000 firmas para exigir al Estado mexicano y a las 32 entidades federativas que implementen acciones urgentes y prioritarias para garantizar la vida y la seguridad de todas las mujeres, niñas y niños en nuestro país. Frente a la minimización del fenómeno de la violencia contra las mujeres, lanzamos la campaña “Nosotras tenemos otros datos”, que ha tenido mucha repercusión. También nos hemos hecho eco de las voces de las mujeres víctimas de violencia que se acercan a nosotras. De modo que estamos bien presentes y lo seguiremos estando.

    ¿Qué cosas deben cambiar después de la pandemia, y cómo podemos trabajar juntos para producir ese cambio?

    La pandemia del COVID-19 vino a evidenciar los problemas de fondo de nuestro país: el acceso sumamente inequitativo a la salud, la educación, la información, la justicia y la restitución de derechos. Desde mi percepción, la post-pandemia también puede ser una gran oportunidad para una reingeniería de nuestro sistema de atención, protección y de seguridad integral para garantizar que todas las personas tengan garantías legales y de hecho para gozar de un bienestar integral y de una vida libre de violencia, y en particular los sectores con mayor vulnerabilidad, entre los que se cuentan las mujeres, niñas y niños, las personas mayores, las personas migrantes y las personas con discapacidad. 

    Necesitamos políticas de Estado que garanticen el acceso igualitario de todas las personas a todos los derechos. Estas políticas de Estado deben tener asignado un presupuesto específico. Debe tratarse de políticas de Estado porque el problema es histórico, excede al gobierno de turno, y las políticas de los gobiernos son desmanteladas cada vez que cambia el gobierno, aún en el caso de acciones afirmativas que estaban dando resultado. Por eso es fundamental transitar a una política de Estado, con presupuesto garantizado y una actuación intersectorial desde un enfoque de género, derechos humanos y multiculturalidad para que ninguna persona se quede fuera. Esta política debe competer tanto al gobierno federal como a las 32 entidades federativas y a la sociedad misma, y por supuesto a las OSC, para transitar hacia una sociedad donde las violencias machistas no se justifiquen y naturalicen, como lamentablemente sigue sucediendo hoy en día. 

    Todas las personas en todos los sectores tenemos que trabajar para lograr un cambio cultural, empezando por nosotras mismas para identificar nuestros propios actos discriminatorios y acciones violentas, así como el modo en que reproducimos mandatos sociales y naturalizamos violencias. Por eso es que creo que el cambio tiene que ser en todos los niveles para que podamos hablar de una verdadera transformación.

    ¿Qué apoyo necesita la Red Nacional de Refugios de la comunidad internacional?

    Necesitamos que la comunidad internacional conozca los retrocesos que están sucediendo en nuestro país en el tema derechos humanos. Es importante que la información llegue a los organismos internacionales porque México ha firmado y ratificado la Convención de Belém do Pará (Convención Interamericana para Prevenir, Sancionar y Erradicar la Violencia contra la Mujer), la Convención sobre la Eliminación de toda forma de Discriminación contra la Mujer (CEDAW) y la Plataforma de Acción de Beijing, y estamos en incumpliendo estas convenciones. El Estado mexicano ya ha recibido muchas recomendaciones internacionales en eses sentido, y no las está abordando con acciones concretas. 

    Por el contrario, el gobierno muchas veces se hace cómplice de las violencias. Cuando ignoran e incluso niegan que las mujeres experimenten violencia en sus casas y que ésta se haya incrementado durante el confinamiento, las autoridades no hacen otra cosa que revictimizar a las víctimas. Asimismo, la política de austeridad está afectando a programas y comunidades. Desde 2019 los refugios han estado en una constante y lamentable lucha para defender su presupuesto, mostrando los beneficios y el impacto que generan en las familias mexicanas. De modo que también necesitamos apoyo bajo la forma de donativos para fortalecer nuestra red nacional y establecer más casas de emergencia y casas de transición, las cuales desempeñan un rol sumamente importante a la hora de cerrar el ciclo de la violencia y restituir los derechos humanos y el estatus de ciudadanía a las mujeres violentadas.

    El espacio cívico en México es clasificado como “represivo” por elCIVICUS Monitor.
    Contáctese con la Red Nacional de Refugios a través de susitio web o su perfil deFacebook, y siga a@RNRoficial en Twitter.
  • MEXICO: ‘Violence against women is a historical pandemic’

    CIVICUS speaks with Wendy Figueroa, director of the Red Nacional de Refugios (National Network of Shelters), a Mexican civil society organisation (CSO) that has been active for more than 20 years. The National Network brings together 69 centres dedicated to the prevention, care and protection of victims of family and gender-based violence throughout Mexico. It carries out comprehensive, multidisciplinary and intersectoral work from a gender, human rights and multicultural perspective. It focuses on public policy advocacy, enhancing the visibility of the problem of family and gender-based violence through campaigns and a media presence, and providing free and specialised comprehensive care for women and their children who experience family and gender-based violence.

    Wendy Figueroa

    How has gender-based violence in Mexico been influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic?

    In Mexico, violence against women is a historic pandemic. It did not just emerge with COVID-19; what the pandemic has done is make the situation more apparent and profound during lockdown. The ‘stay home’ measures to mitigate COVID-19 mean that hundreds of women are in a situation of greater risk and vulnerability. Gender-based violence is magnified under the pandemic precisely because within lockdown, women are overloaded with care tasks, domestic work and the responsibility to optimise the resources available in their home: all of this, of course, while under pressure from the aggressor who lives with them.

    How has the National Network responded?

    We have reinforced the activities and interventions that we have been conducting for many years. What characterises the work of the National Network is that, although our work has been constant, our experience in approaches to prevent, attend to and eliminate violence against women, boys and girls has adapted and been enriched with time. These approaches are updated according to the needs of women, boys and girls – and so our responses in this period of lockdown have also been enriched and strengthened in several ways.

    First, the Network has a telephone helpline operating 24 hours a day throughout the year, and we also provide assistance through social media. We have strengthened these, increasing the number of professionals who provide care through these two communication spaces. We also implemented a WhatsApp number as we have seen that when more time is spent in lockdown, women in situations of abuse have fewer possibilities to make external contact. So, text or social media messages have become an extremely important vehicle for women to send us a message whenever they get the chance.

    In several cases, these messages have resulted in rescue operations. During confinement, women have had to leave at the first opportunity when their aggressor is not at home, and as a result rescues have increased exponentially. In just two months we have carried out 19 rescues, compared with just around one per month during the equivalent months in 2019. To achieve this, we have had to be creative and have established alliances with some private companies such as Avon and Uber to arrange logistics and transportation.

    Second, our information, awareness and prevention campaigns have focused on three moments that women who experience abuse go through, in order to share strategies of what to do before, during and after a violent event. We also share strategies to reduce risk situations with children at home and to establish safety plans. We have carried out an inclusive and multicultural campaign, with messages in sign language for deaf women, and messages for Indigenous women in three languages: Mayan, Náhuatl and Zapotec.

    Given that COVID-19 makes pre-existing forms of discrimination and inequalities deeper and more visible, and that women are to a greater degree in this situation of vulnerability, we have also created material aimed at society at large. We promote among the public the establishment of solidarity support networks to make gender-based violence and violence against children more visible, so that people can denounce situations of violence and participate in the construction of a zero-tolerance culture.

    Third, we have carried out the ‘isolation without violence’ campaign, aimed at the government, underscoring the urgency and necessity of creating cross-sectional, resourced public policies that address the consequences and impact of COVID-19 for women from gender, human rights and multicultural perspectives. As the quarantine is lifted, these polices must guarantee access to justice, health services and financial compensation, among other rights.

    Fourth, we have carried out specific actions within the shelters, emergency centres, transition houses and external centres that make up the Network, implementing protocols to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 infection. We have used our creativity to provide assistance through various digital platforms to keep accompanying all the women who take part in our comprehensive programmes. Attention hours within these spaces have been staggered and quarantine rooms established so that we can continue to take in the women and children who require support without any obstacle or discrimination due to COVID-19, as for us it is extremely important to put human rights at the core of our actions.

    We are seeking international and private sector funding to strengthen our network of emergency and transition houses. Emergency houses are the step prior to entering a shelter and we are currently using them to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 infection in shelters: instead of the usual three days, stays have been extended to last the 14 days of quarantine. As for transition houses, they are extremely important because they are the spaces available for women leaving shelters who lack a home or solid support networks. In these transitional spaces they put into practice the plans that they developed during their stay in the shelters and start moving towards independence. But as a result of the economic impacts of COVID-19, the employment agreements that we had for these women have been cancelled. In this context, transitional houses allow women to continue with their process and avoid frustration and re-victimisation.

    Have you faced additional restrictions on the freedoms to organise, speak up and mobilise during the pandemic?

    Generally speaking, of course there have been limitations on mobility as a result of the ‘stay home’ campaign. In response, we have channelled much of our assistance through social media and over the phone. But we have not neglected face-to-face care: there are some cities where we operate in which there is no alternative available to the external attention centre of the local CSO that belongs to the National Network, and in those cases we have continued to provide face-to-face assistance, while taking all necessary precautions to reduce the risk of contagion. We also continue operating and providing in-person care, where necessary, in all our protection spaces: emergency houses, shelters and transition houses. And we continue to mobilise when necessary.

    The freedom of assembly is limited, but it is not forbidden for us to take action in the face of femicides and other rights violations. We continue operating according to our model and on the basis of our guiding principles, namely human rights and women’s lives. We have reorganised to follow social distancing when possible but, above all, focusing on the needs of the families we assist.

    How has the feminist movement adapted when transitioning from mass protests to social isolation?

    We have transformed our ways of protesting, our ways of raising our voices, of joining together in sisterhood to seek justice, substantive equality and respect of all the rights of women and children. We have used digital platforms and technology to keep communicating, networking and proposing actions. Feminist movements did not go silent as COVID-19 arrived: through all these digital media and platforms we have held talks, webinars, solidarity meetings, encounters to express our feelings and exercise solidarity. We have held feminist exchanges to support our sisters’ economy and offer our professional services as psychologists, doctors and lawyers over social media.

    We have also continued making statements. We recently produced, along with 42 other feminist groups, a video that accompanies a letter that gathered over 6,000 signatures to demand that the Mexican federal government and the 32 state governments implement urgent and priority actions to guarantee the life and safety of all women, girls and boys in our country. In the face of the minimisation of violence against women, we launched the We Have Other Data campaign, which has had quite an impact. And we have also echoed the voices of the women who are victims of violence and have sought our help. So we are definitely and fully present and we will continue to be.

    What needs to change after the pandemic, and how can we work together to bring about that change?

    The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted all of our country’s underlying problems: those of an extremely unequal access to health, education, information, justice and rights restitution. From my perspective, the post-pandemic era can be a great opportunity to reengineer our systems of care, protection and security to ensure that everyone has both legal guarantees and actual opportunities to lead a life free of violence – and particularly those groups in a situation of greater vulnerability, including women, girls and boys, older people, migrants and people with disabilities.

    We need state policies that guarantee equal access to all rights for all people. These state policies need to have a designated budget. And they must be state-level policies rather than government policies because this is not a problem of the current administration – it is a historical problem. Government policies are typically dismantled every time the government changes, even in the case of affirmative action policies that are producing good results. This is why it is essential to move towards intersectoral state policy with a guaranteed budget. These must include gender, human rights and multicultural perspectives so that no one is left out. These policies must be the responsibility not just of the federal government, but also of our 32 states and of society itself, and of course of CSOs as well, so we can advance towards a society where sexist violence is not justified and normalised, as is unfortunately currently the case.

    All people in all sectors have to work to achieve cultural change, starting with ourselves to identify our own discriminatory acts and violent actions, as well as how we reproduce social mandates and naturalise violence. This is why I believe that change needs to take place at all levels before it is really possible to speak of a true transformation.

    What support does the National Network need from the international community?

    We need the international community to know the human rights regression that our country is going through. It is important for information to reach international organisations because the state of Mexico has signed and ratified the Convention of Belém do Pará (the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence against Women), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Beijing Platform for Action, and it is in breach of all these conventions. Mexico has already received many international recommendations in this regard but is not addressing them with real actions.

    On the contrary, the government is often complicit in the violence. When they ignore and even deny that women experience violence in their homes and that this problem has increased during lockdown, the authorities do nothing but re-victimise the victims. Likewise, austerity policies are affecting programmes and communities. Since 2019 shelters have been in a regrettable, constant struggle to defend their budget, showing the benefits and impact they have on Mexican families. So we also need support in the form of donations to strengthen our national network and establish more emergency houses and transition houses, which play an extremely important role in closing the cycle of violence and delivering true citizenship and protection of human rights.

    Civic space in Mexico is rated as ‘repressed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
    Get in touch with the National Network of Shelters through itswebsite andFacebook page, or follow@RNRoficial on Twitter.
  • Mexique : « La violence à l’égard des femmes est une pandémie séculaire »

    Wendy FigueroaCIVICUS s’entretient avec Wendy Figueroa, directrice de laRed Nacional de Refugios (Réseau National des Refuges), une organisation de la société civile (OSC) mexicaine dont le travail est ininterrompu depuis plus de 20 ans. Le Réseau comprend 69 espaces de prévention, de soins et de protection des victimes de violence domestique et sexiste dans tout le pays. Il travaille selon une approche multidisciplinaire et intersectorielle, avec une perspective de genre, de droits humains et multiculturelle. Il se concentre sur la défense des politiques publiques, la sensibilisation au problème par des campagnes et une couverture médiatique, et la fourniture de soins complets spécialisés et gratuits aux femmes et à leurs enfants victimes de violences domestiques et sexistes.

     

     

    Comment la violence sexiste au Mexique a-t-elle été influencée par la pandémie de COVID-19 ?

    Au Mexique, la violence contre les femmes est une pandémie séculaire. Elle n’a pas seulement émergé avec la COVID-19 ; la pandémie n'a fait que rendre la situation plus apparente et plus prononcée pendant le confinement. Les mesures de confinement adoptées pour atténuer les conséquences de la pandémie de COVID-19 ont eu pour effet d'accroître les risques et la vulnérabilité pour des centaines de femmes. La violence sexiste a également été exacerbée pendant la pandémie, précisément parce qu'en période de confinement, les femmes se retrouvent avec une surcharge de responsabilités en matière de soins, de travaux domestiques et d'optimisation des ressources disponibles dans leur foyer, tout cela en subissant la pression de l’agresseur qui vit avec elles.

    Comment le Réseau National a-t-il réagi ?

    Nous avons renforcé les activités et les interventions que nous développons depuis de nombreuses années. Ce qui caractérise le travail du Réseau National des Refuges, c’est que, bien que notre travail ait été constant, nos approches pour prévenir, traiter et éliminer la violence envers les femmes et les enfants se sont adaptées et enrichies avec le temps. Ces approches sont mises à jour en fonction des besoins des femmes et des enfants. Ainsi, nos réponses pendant la période de confinement ont été enrichies et renforcées de différentes manières.

    Tout d’abord, le Réseau dispose d’une ligne d’assistance téléphonique qui fonctionne 24 heures sur 24, tout au long de l’année, et propose également une assistance par le biais des réseaux sociaux. Nous avons renforcé ces derniers, en augmentant le nombre de professionnels qui fournissent des soins à travers ces deux espaces de communication. Nous avons également mis en place un numéro WhatsApp car nous avons constaté que plus le temps passé en confinement est long, moins les femmes victimes de violences ont la possibilité de contacter le monde extérieur. Ainsi, les SMS ou les messages sur les médias sociaux sont devenus un moyen extrêmement utile pour les femmes de nous envoyer un message dès qu'elles en avaient l'occasion.

    Dans de nombreux cas, ces messages ont permis de mener des opérations de sauvetage. Dans le contexte du confinement, les femmes devaient partir à la première occasion, lorsque leur agresseur n'était pas à la maison, de sorte que les opérations de sauvetage ont augmenté de façon spectaculaire. En seulement deux mois, nous avons effectué 19 opérations de sauvetage, contre à peine un par mois environ pendant la même période en 2019. Pour y parvenir, nous avons dû faire preuve de créativité et avons établi des partenariats avec certaines entreprises privées, comme Avon et Uber, afin d’organiser la logistique et le transport.

    Deuxièmement, nos campagnes d’information, de sensibilisation et de prévention se sont concentrées sur trois moments que traversent les femmes qui subissent des violences, afin de partager des stratégies sur ce qu’il faut faire avant, pendant et après un événement violent. Nous avons également partagé des stratégies pour réduire les situations à risque avec les enfants à la maison et établir des plans de sécurité. Nous avons mené une campagne inclusive et multiculturelle, avec des messages en langue des signes pour les femmes malentendantes et des messages en langues nahuatl, zapotèque et maya pour les femmes des communautés autochtones.

    Étant donné que la COVID-19 rend plus prononcées et plus visibles les formes préexistantes de discrimination et d'inégalités, et que les femmes se trouvent dans une situation de plus grande vulnérabilité, nous avons également créé du matériel destiné à la société dans son ensemble. Nous encourageons les citoyens à former des réseaux de soutien solidaire pour rendre visible la violence contre les femmes et les enfants, afin que les citoyens puissent dénoncer les situations de violence et participer à la construction d’une culture de tolérance zéro.

    Troisièmement, nous avons développé la campagne « confinement sans violence », destinée au gouvernement, soulignant la nécessité et l’urgence de créer de politiques publiques transversales, dotées de ressources, pour faire face aux conséquences et à l’impact de la pandémie sur les femmes, dans une perspective de genre, de droits humains, et multiculturelle. Ces politiques doivent garantir l’accès à la justice, aux services de santé et aux compensations économiques, entre autres droits. 

    Quatrièmement, nous avons mené des actions spécifiques au sein des refuges, des centres d’urgence, des maisons de transition et des centres externes qui composent le Réseau, en mettant en œuvre des protocoles visant à atténuer le risque d'infection par le COVID-19. Nous avons utilisé notre créativité pour fournir une assistance à travers différentes plateformes numériques afin de continuer à accompagner toutes les femmes qui participent à nos programmes. Nous avons échelonné les heures d’attention au sein des refuges et mis en place des salles de quarantaine pour continuer à permettre l’accès aux femmes et aux enfants qui en ont besoin sans obstacles ni discrimination dus au coronavirus, car selon nous il est essentiel de placer les droits humains au cœur de nos actions.

    Nous recherchons des financements internationaux et du secteur privé pour renforcer notre réseau de centres d’urgence et de transition. Les centres d’urgence sont l'étape précédant l'entrée dans un refuge et nous les utilisons actuellement pour atténuer le risque d’infection par le COVID-19 dans les refuges : au lieu des trois jours habituels, les séjours dans les centres d’urgence durent maintenant 14 jours, ce qui correspond au temps de quarantaine. Les centres de transition sont très importants car ils constituent l’espace disponible pour les femmes qui quittent le refuge et ne disposent pas d’un logement ou d’un réseau de soutien solide. Dans ces espaces de transition, elles mettent en pratique les plans qu'elles ont élaborés pendant leur séjour dans les refuges et commencent à cheminer vers l'indépendance. Cependant, en raison des impacts économiques de la COVID-19, les contrats de travail que nous avions pour ces femmes ont été annulés. Dans ce contexte, les centres de transition offrent aux femmes la possibilité de poursuivre leur processus et d'éviter la frustration et la victimisation.

    Avez-vous été confrontés à des restrictions supplémentaires concernant les libertés de rassemblement, d'expression et de mobilisation pendant la pandémie ?

    D'une manière générale, la mobilité a bien sûr été limitée par le confinement. En réponse à cela, nous avons traité une grande partie de l’assistance par téléphone et par les médias sociaux. Mais nous n’avons pas négligé l'assistance en face à face : dans certaines villes où nous opérons, il n’existe pas d’alternative au centre d’attention externe de l’OSC locale qui appartient au Réseau National, et dans ces cas-là, nous avons continué à fournir une assistance en face à face, en prenant toutes les précautions pour réduire le risque de contagion. Nous continuons également à fonctionner et à fournir des soins en personne, si nécessaire, dans tous nos espaces dédiés à la protection : centres d’urgence, refuges et centres de transition. Et nous continuons à nous mobiliser en cas de besoin.

    La liberté de réunion est limitée, mais il ne nous est pas interdit d'agir face aux féminicides et autres violations des droits. Nous continuons à agir selon notre modèle et sur la base de nos principes directeurs, à savoir les droits humains et le respect de la vie des femmes. Nous nous sommes réorganisés pour respecter la distanciation sociale lorsque cela est possible, mais surtout pour nous concentrer sur les besoins des familles que nous aidons.

    Comment le mouvement féministe s’est-il adapté à la transition entre les manifestations de masse et l'isolement social ?

    Nous avons transformé nos façons de protester, d’élever la voix, de nous unir dans la fraternité pour demander la justice, l’égalité réelle et le respect de tous les droits des femmes et des enfants. Nous avons utilisé les plateformes numériques et la technologie pour continuer à communiquer, à créer des réseaux et à proposer des actions. Les mouvements féministes ne se sont pas arrêtés avec l'arrivée de la COVID-19 : grâce aux médias et aux plateformes numériques, nous avons organisé des conversations, des webinaires, des réunions de solidarité, des rencontres pour exprimer nos sentiments et exercer notre solidarité. Nous avons établi des échanges féministes pour soutenir les activités économiques de nos consœurs et offrir nos services professionnels en tant que psychologues, médecins et avocates sur les médias sociaux.

    Nous avons également multiplié les déclarations. Nous avons récemment produit, avec 42 autres groupes féministes, une vidéo qui accompagne une lettre comportant plus de 6 000 signatures pour exiger que l’État mexicain et les 32 États mettent en œuvre des actions urgentes et prioritaires pour garantir la vie et la sécurité de toutes les femmes et de tous les enfants de notre pays. Face à la minimisation du phénomène de la violence contre les femmes, nous avons lancé la campagne « Nosotras tenemos otros datos », qui a eu un impact considérable. Nous nous sommes également fait l’écho des voix des femmes victimes de violence qui ont sollicité notre aide. Nous sommes donc bel et bien présents et nous continuerons à l’être.

    Que faut-il changer après la pandémie, et comment pouvons-nous travailler ensemble pour provoquer ce changement ?

    La pandémie de COVID-19 a mis en lumière les problèmes de fond de notre pays : l’accès très inégal à la santé, à l’éducation, à l’information, à la justice et aux droits. De mon point de vue, l’après-pandémie peut également être une grande opportunité pour réorganiser notre système de soins, de protection et de sécurité globale, afin de s’assurer que toutes les personnes disposent à la fois de garanties légales et d’opportunités réelles de mener une vie sans violence - et en particulier les groupes les plus vulnérables, notamment les femmes, les enfants, les personnes âgées, les migrants et les personnes souffrant de handicap.

    Nous avons besoin de politiques publiques qui garantissent l’égalité d’accès de tous à tous les droits. Ces politiques publiques doivent bénéficier d’un budget spécifique. Et il doit s'agir de politiques d'État plutôt que de politiques gouvernementales, car ce n'est pas un problème de l'administration actuelle - c'est un problème historique. Or, les politiques gouvernementales sont démantelées à chaque changement de gouvernement, même dans le cas de politiques de discrimination positive, qui donnent pourtant de bons résultats. C’est pourquoi il est essentiel de s’orienter vers une politique d’État, avec un budget garanti et une action intersectorielle. Ces politiques doivent inclure les perspectives de genre, de droits humains et de diversité, afin que personne ne soit laissé de côté. Elles devraient relever de la responsabilité du gouvernement fédéral, mais aussi des 32 États et de la société elle-même, et bien sûr des OSC, afin de progresser vers une société où la violence sexiste n’est pas justifiée et naturalisée, comme cela continue malheureusement d’être le cas actuellement. 

    Toutes les personnes, dans tous les secteurs, doivent œuvrer à un changement culturel, en commençant par nous-mêmes, afin d’identifier nos propres actes discriminatoires et actions violentes, ainsi que la manière dont nous reproduisons les codes sociaux et naturalisons la violence. C’est pourquoi je pense que le changement doit s’opérer à tous les niveaux avant que l'on puisse réellement parler d'une véritable transformation.

    De quel type de soutien le Réseau National a-t-il besoin de la part de la communauté internationale ?

    Nous voulons que la communauté internationale soit informée des régressions que connaît notre pays dans le domaine des droits humains. Il est important que l’information parvienne aux organisations internationales, car l’Etat mexicain a signé et ratifié la Convention de Belém do Pará (Convention interaméricaine sur la prévention, la sanction et l’élimination de la violence contre la femme), la Convention sur l’élimination de toutes les formes de discrimination à l’égard des femmes (CEDAW) et le Programme d’action de Beijing, et il n’en respecte aucune. L’État mexicain a déjà reçu de nombreuses recommandations internationales à cet égard, mais n’y répond pas par des actions concrètes. 

    Au contraire, le gouvernement est souvent complice de la violence. En ignorant, voire en niant, que les femmes subissent des violences au sein de leur foyer et que celles-ci ont augmenté pendant le confinement, les autorités condamnent à nouveau les victimes. De plus, la politique d’austérité affecte les programmes et les communautés. Depuis 2019, les refuges mènent une lutte regrettable et constante pour défendre leur budget, en montrant les bénéfices et l’impact qu’ils génèrent auprès des familles mexicaines. Nous avons donc également besoin d’un soutien sous forme de dons pour renforcer notre réseau national et créer davantage de centres d’urgence et de transition, qui jouent un rôle crucial pour fermer le cycle de la violence et assurer une véritable citoyenneté et la protection des droits humains.

    L’espace civique au Mexique est classé comme « réprimé » par leCIVICUS Monitor.

    Contactez le Réseau National des Refuges via sonsite web ou son profilFacebook, et suivez@RNRoficial sur Twitter.
  • MIGRACIÓN: “La propagación de la COVID-19 no es excusa para tratar a personas vulnerables con mayor violencia”

    CIVICUS conversa con Maddalena Avon, coordinadora de proyectos del Centro de Estudios para la Paz (CPS), sobre la situación de las personas migrantes y refugiadas en Europa en el marco de la pandemia y las formas en que la sociedad civil está respondiendo a la creciente presión fronteriza ejercida por gobiernos europeos hostiles.

    CPS es una organización de la sociedad civil (OSC) que promueve la no violencia y el cambio social a través de la educación, la investigación, la incidencia, las campañas y el activismo. Fundada en 1996, trabaja en tres áreas: asilo, integración y seguridad humana; educación para la paz y afirmación de la no violencia; y lucha contra las desigualdades. CPS es miembro activo de la Red de Monitoreo de la Violencia en las Fronteras, una red independiente de OSC basadas en su mayoría en los Balcanes y Grecia, que monitorea las violaciones de derechos humanos en las fronteras exteriores de la Unión Europea y aboga por poner fin a la violencia contra las personas en movimiento.

    Maddalena Avon

    ¿Cuáles han sido las principales tendencias migratorias en Europa, y específicamente en los Balcanes, durante la pandemia?

    El panorama del acceso al asilo ha cambiado drásticamente desde que entraron en vigor las restricciones establecidas en respuesta a la pandemia. La Red de Monitoreo de la Violencia en las Fronteras (BVMN) ya había publicado informes que referían al asilo como un conjunto de derechos erosionados, pero el debido proceso para las solicitudes de protección internacional se ha visto aún más cuestionado en el marco de la emergencia sanitaria de los últimos meses.

    En primer lugar, las persistentes medidas de devolución en las fronteras siguen impidiendo a las personas solicitar protección internacional, y los Estados realizan expulsiones colectivas. En segundo lugar, las decisiones de los gobiernos de suspender o cerrar las oficinas de asilo sin ofrecer ninguna alternativa o remedio eficaz han colocado a las personas refugiadas y otros migrantes en un limbo efectivo y en riesgo de devolución. Igualmente, la implementación de medidas contra la COVID-19 ha permitido a países como Croacia, Grecia y Hungría restringir aún más el acceso a protecciones internacionalmente garantizadas.

    En medio de la escalada del brote de COVID-19, la Unión Europea (UE) lanzó su Plan de Acción Conjunto para los Derechos Humanos. Sin embargo, el espíritu de esta declaración diverge agudamente con la realidad sobre el terreno. En particular, continúan las violaciones de derechos fundamentales por parte de Estados miembros de la UE y de terceros países que tienen con la UE diversos acuerdos sobre migración, asilo y seguridad fronteriza, así como sistemas de campamentos financiados. En lugar de ayudar a las comunidades vulnerables en este período de precariedad, las políticas y regulaciones han permitido que el fortalecimiento de las fronteras de la mayoría de los Estados miembros erosione aún más los derechos de asilo, el debido proceso y el trato humanitario.

    Según un reciente informe de la BVMN, en marzo y abril de 2020 Eslovenia experimentó un descenso en el número de cruces irregulares de fronteras en comparación con los dos primeros meses de 2021 y el mismo periodo de 2019, y esto se reflejó en el número mucho menor de personas detenidas en las comisarías debido a cruces irregulares de fronteras. Sin embargo, la cantidad de expulsiones colectivas a Croacia se mantuvo constantemente alta. A principios de 2020, durante el brote de COVID-19 y las restricciones subsiguientes, Eslovenia continuó negando sistemáticamente el derecho de asilo y utilizó su acuerdo de readmisión con Croacia -que le permite entregar personas a la policía croata si hay pruebas de que han cruzado ilegalmente la frontera en las últimas 48 horas- para deportar a un gran número de personas, aunque el acuerdo de readmisión no se aplica si la persona ha pedido asilo o es un potencial solicitante de asilo. Ha seguido haciéndolo a pesar de ser plenamente consciente del alto riesgo de tortura y de nuevas expulsiones ilegales a Bosnia y Herzegovina.

    En Croacia, como en otros lugares, la pandemia ha cambiado muchas cosas, pero algunas cuestiones, como el régimen de expulsiones, desgraciadamente se mantienen igual. La única diferencia es que estas violentas expulsiones colectivas atraen ahora menos atención, ya que todas las miradas están puestas en la pandemia y no se ha permitido a los observadores de derechos humanos permanecer en el terreno a causa de las restricciones sanitarias. Las expulsiones y la violencia en las fronteras han persistido: en un caso de los cientos documentados por la BVMN, un grupo que incluía a una persona gravemente herida y a un menor fue golpeado con porras por agentes croatas, que también quemaron su ropa, y el grupo fue devuelto a Bosnia y Herzegovina.

    Un fenómeno relativamente nuevo en materia de prácticas de devolución es el de marcar a grupos de personas con pintura en aerosol naranja, como informó No Name Kitchen, una organización de base y miembro de la BVMN que presta asistencia directa a personas en movimiento en ciudades fronterizas a lo largo de la Ruta de los Balcanes. También han continuado las devoluciones en cadena desde Eslovenia a través de Croacia, que envían de regreso a las personas migrantes por el mismo camino por el que llegaron.

    Resultan preocupantes los reportes que indican un aumento de la brutalidad en el marco de las devoluciones, dada la mayor autonomía que las autoridades estatales han ganado con la pandemia. Las devoluciones son ilegales y la propagación de la COVID-19 no es excusa para tratar a personas vulnerables con mayor violencia.

    ¿Cómo responden el CPS y la BVMN a estas tendencias?

    El valor del trabajo realizado por la BVMN radica en la interconexión de diversos métodos: el trabajo de campo, que incluye el establecimiento de relaciones de confianza con las personas localizadas en zonas fronterizas, la recolección de testimonios y el trabajo de incidencia política, que supone la presentación de demandas claras a las instituciones para que rindan cuentas de determinadas acciones. El trabajo jurídico también es esencial cuando las personas que han sobrevivido a violaciones de derechos humanos quieren reclamar justicia. Cada miembro de la BVMN es fuerte en uno o varios de estos métodos de trabajo, y nuestra fuerza colectiva consiste en combinarlos a todos en un enfoque integral.

    Dentro de la red, el CPS lleva a cabo investigaciones que alimentan nuestros esfuerzos de concientización e incidencia sobre el acceso al sistema de asilo, la protección de los derechos humanos de las personas refugiadas, la conducta ilegal de la policía, la criminalización de la solidaridad y la integración, con especial atención al empleo y la educación.

    En lo que se refiere a la integración, dos de nuestros grandes éxitos han sido la Brújula del Danubio, una herramienta web que incluye toda la información relevante para la integración de personas migrantes y refugiadas en la sociedad croata, y nuestro programa de educación no formal para solicitantes de asilo, Hablemos de la Sociedad, que ofrece a los nuevos miembros de nuestra comunidad una introducción a la sociedad y las instituciones croatas, les informa acerca de sus derechos y fomenta su participación activa en la sociedad.

    Dentro de la red, el CPS es un fuerte actor jurídico, ya que hasta ahora hemos presentado 12 denuncias penales contra autores desconocidos en uniforme de policía. Mediante un litigio estratégico, impedimos una extradición y logramos presentar dos demandas contra la República de Croacia ante el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Como resultado de nuestra labor de incidencia, varias instituciones internacionales y de la UE, incluida la Agencia de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados, comenzaron a cuestionar y condenar las prácticas de las autoridades croatas.

    Como consecuencia de nuestra exposición pública de las prácticas ilegales hacia las personas refugiadas, hemos sufrido mucha presión y se nos prohibió ingresar y trabajar en los centros de asilo. Esto dificultó nuestro trabajo, pero no comprometió nuestra autonomía.

    ¿Consideras que se ha logrado algún progreso para que Frontex, la agencia fronteriza europea, rinda cuentas por no proteger los derechos humanos?

    Frontex ha enfrentado graves acusaciones de violaciones de derechos humanos procedentes de diversos actores e instituciones, y la sociedad civil se ha unido en torno de múltiples campañas y acciones sobre el asunto, incluyendo #DefundFrontex. Con el apoyo de 22 OSC y redes de sociedad civil, incluida la BVMN, esta campaña reclama que se desfinancie a la agencia y que su presupuesto se reoriente hacia la creación de un programa europeo de salvamento marítimo civil dirigido y financiado por los gobiernos.

    El principal problema es que Frontex opera en una zona gris en materia legal y se considera que no tiene responsabilidad por sus acciones: la responsabilidad siempre recae sobre el Estado miembro donde Frontex opera. Las normas de la agencia están redactadas de forma tal que en gran medida le permiten no rendir cuentas. Sin embargo, estamos viendo pequeños pasos hacia un cambio en este sentido, por ejemplo con la participación activa de la Defensoría del Pueblo Europeo.

    ¿Cómo puede la sociedad civil presionar a la UE para que su compromiso con los derechos humanos se extienda a las personas migrantes y refugiadas, y cómo puede alentar a los Estados miembros a respetar sus derechos?

    Una de las formas que los miembros de la BVMN han encontrado para aunar múltiples fuerzas y ser más asertivos en demandas clave es la construcción de redes transfronterizas. Creemos que la implicación activa de la sociedad civil en cada zona fronteriza, país y pueblo puede suponer una diferencia real en la influencia ciudadana. Es muy importante expresarnos con voz fuerte en defensa de los derechos de refugiados y migrantes. También es importante conectar una variedad de luchas que están muy interconectadas y que tienen lugar a través de las fronteras, tales como las luchas relativas al cambio climático y los derechos de las mujeres.

    El espacio cívico en Croacia es calificado como “estrecho” por el CIVICUS Monitor.

    Póngase en contacto con el Centro de Estudios para la Paz a través de su sitio web o su página de Facebook, y siga a @CMSZagreb en Twitter.
    Póngase en contacto con la Red de Monitoreo de la Violencia en las Fronteras a través de su sitio web o su página de Facebook, y siga a @Border_Violence en Twitter.
  • MIGRATION : « La propagation du COVID-19 n’est pas une excuse pour traiter les personnes vulnérables avec plus de violence »

    CIVICUS s’entretient avec Maddalena Avon, coordinatrice de projet au Centre d’études sur la paix (CPS), sur la situation des migrants et des réfugiés en Europe dans le contexte de la pandémie et sur la manière dont la société civile répond à la pression croissante des gouvernements européens hostiles aux frontières.

    Le CPS est une organisation de la société civile (OSC) qui promeut la non-violence et le changement social par l’éducation, la recherche, le plaidoyer, les campagnes et l’activisme. Fondée en 1996, elle travaille dans trois domaines : l’asile, l’intégration et la sécurité humaine ; l’éducation à la paix et l’affirmation de la non-violence ; et la lutte contre les inégalités. Le CPS est un membre actif du Border Violence Monitoring Network, un réseau indépendant d’OSC basé principalement dans les Balkans et en Grèce, qui surveille les violations des droits humains aux frontières extérieures de l’Union européenne et plaide pour la fin de la violence à l’encontre des personnes déplacées.

    Maddalena Avon

    Quelles ont été les principales tendances migratoires en Europe, et plus particulièrement dans les Balkans, pendant la pandémie ?

    Le paysage de l’accès à l’asile a radicalement changé depuis l’entrée en vigueur des restrictions mises en place en réponse à la pandémie. Le Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN) avait déjà publié des rapports faisant référence à l’asile comme à un ensemble de droits érodés, mais la procédure régulière pour les demandes de protection internationale a été davantage remise en question dans le contexte de l’urgence sanitaire de ces derniers mois.

    Premièrement, les mesures de refoulement persistantes aux frontières continuent de priver les personnes de l’accès à la protection internationale, les États procédant à des expulsions collectives. Deuxièmement, les décisions gouvernementales de suspendre ou de fermer les bureaux d’asile sans offrir d’alternative ou de recours efficace ont placé les réfugiés et autres migrants dans une situation de flou et de risque de refoulement. De même, la mise en œuvre de mesures anti-COVID-19 a donné la possibilité à des pays comme la Croatie, la Grèce et la Hongrie de restreindre davantage l’accès aux protections garanties au niveau international.

    Au milieu de l’escalade de l’épidémie de COVID-19, l’Union européenne (UE) a lancé son plan d’action conjoint pour les droits humains. Cependant, l’esprit de cette déclaration diverge fortement de la réalité sur le terrain. En particulier, les violations des droits fondamentaux par les États membres de l’UE et les pays tiers qui ont conclu divers accords avec l’UE sur la migration, l’asile et la sécurité des frontières, ainsi que des systèmes de camps financés, se poursuivent. Au lieu d’aider les communautés vulnérables en cette période de précarité, les politiques et les réglementations ont permis le renforcement des frontières de la plupart des États membres, ce qui a eu pour effet d’éroder encore davantage les droits à l’asile, à des procédures régulières et à un traitement humain.

    Selon un récent rapport du BVMN, en mars et avril 2020, la Slovénie a connu une diminution du nombre de franchissements irréguliers de la frontière par rapport aux deux premiers mois de 2021 et à la même période en 2019, ce qui s’est traduit par un nombre beaucoup plus faible de personnes détenues dans les postes de police en raison de franchissements irréguliers de la frontière. Toutefois, le nombre d’expulsions collectives vers la Croatie est resté constamment élevé. Début 2020, pendant l’épidémie de COVID-19 et les restrictions qui ont suivi, la Slovénie a continué à refuser systématiquement le droit d’asile et a utilisé son accord de réadmission avec la Croatie - qui l’autorise à remettre des personnes à la police croate s’il existe des preuves qu’elles ont franchi illégalement la frontière au cours des dernières 48 heures - pour expulser un grand nombre de personnes, bien que l’accord de réadmission ne s’applique pas si la personne a demandé l’asile ou est un demandeur d’asile potentiel. Elle a continué à le faire en pleine connaissance du risque élevé de torture et de nouvelles expulsions illégales vers la Bosnie-Herzégovine.

    En Croatie, comme ailleurs, la pandémie a changé beaucoup de choses, mais certains éléments, comme le régime d’expulsion, sont malheureusement restés les mêmes. La seule différence est que ces expulsions collectives violentes attirent désormais moins l’attention, car tous les regards sont tournés vers la pandémie et les observateurs des droits humains n’ont pas été autorisés à rester sur le terrain en raison de restrictions sanitaires. Les expulsions et les violences aux frontières ont persisté : dans un cas sur les centaines documentés par le BVMN, un groupe comprenant une personne gravement blessée et un mineur a été battu à coups de matraque par des officiers croates, qui ont également brûlé leurs vêtements, et le groupe a été renvoyé en Bosnie-Herzégovine.

    Un phénomène relativement nouveau dans les pratiques de refoulement est le marquage de groupes de personnes avec des bombes de peinture orange, comme le rapporte No Name Kitchen, une organisation de base et membre du BVMN qui fournit une assistance directe aux personnes en déplacement dans les villes frontalières le long de la route des Balkans. Les refoulements en série se sont également poursuivis de la Slovénie à la Croatie, renvoyant les migrants sur le même chemin par lequel ils sont arrivés.

    Les rapports faisant état d’une brutalité accrue dans le contexte des refoulements sont inquiétants, compte tenu de l’autonomie accrue que les autorités étatiques ont acquise grâce à la pandémie. Les refoulements sont illégaux et la propagation de la COVID-19 n’est pas une excuse pour traiter les personnes vulnérables avec plus de violence.

    Comment le CPS et le BVMN répondent-ils à ces tendances ?

    La valeur du travail effectué par le BVMN réside dans l’interconnexion de différentes méthodes : le travail de terrain, qui comprend l’établissement de relations de confiance avec les personnes situées dans les zones frontalières, la collecte de témoignages, et le travail de plaidoyer, qui consiste à demander clairement aux institutions de rendre compte de certaines actions. Le travail juridique est également essentiel lorsque les victimes de violations des droits humains veulent réclamer justice. Chaque membre du BVMN présente une compétence propre dans l’une ou plusieurs de ces méthodes de travail, et notre force collective est de les combiner toutes dans une approche holistique.

    Au sein du réseau, le CPS mène des recherches qui alimentent nos efforts de sensibilisation et de plaidoyer sur l’accès au système d’asile, la protection des droits humains des réfugiés, les comportements policiers illégaux, la criminalisation de la solidarité et l’intégration, en mettant l’accent sur l’emploi et l’éducation.

    En termes d’intégration, deux de nos grandes réussites ont été le Danube Compass, un outil web qui comprend toutes les informations pertinentes pour l’intégration des migrants et des réfugiés dans la société croate, et notre programme d’éducation non formelle pour les demandeurs d’asile, « Let's Talk about Society » (Parlons de la société), qui offre aux nouveaux membres de notre communauté une introduction à la société et aux institutions croates, les informe sur leurs droits et encourage leur participation active dans la société.

    Au sein du réseau, le CPS est un acteur juridique fort, puisque nous avons jusqu’à présent déposé 12 plaintes pénales contre des auteurs inconnus en uniforme de police. Grâce à un contentieux stratégique, nous avons empêché une extradition et réussi à déposer deux plaintes contre la République de Croatie devant la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme. Grâce à notre travail de plaidoyer, plusieurs institutions internationales et européennes, dont l’Agence des Nations unies pour les réfugiés, ont commencé à remettre en question et à condamner les pratiques des autorités croates.

    En raison de notre dénonciation publique des pratiques illégales à l’égard des réfugiés, nous avons subi de fortes pressions et avons été interdits d’accès et de travail dans les centres d’asile. Cela a rendu notre travail plus difficile, mais n’a pas compromis notre autonomie.

    Pensez-vous que des progrès ont été réalisés pour tenir Frontex, l’agence européenne des frontières, responsable de son incapacité à protéger les droits humains ?

    Frontex a fait face à de graves allégations de violations des droits humains de la part de divers acteurs et institutions, et la société civile s’est unie autour de multiples campagnes et actions sur la question, notamment #DefundFrontex. Avec le soutien de 22 OSC et réseaux de la société civile, dont le BVMN, cette campagne appelle à la suppression de l’agence et à la réorientation de son budget vers la création d’un programme civil européen de sauvetage en mer géré et financé par les gouvernements.

    Le principal problème est que Frontex opère dans une zone grise juridique et est considérée comme n’ayant aucune responsabilité pour ses actions : la responsabilité incombe toujours à l’État membre dans lequel Frontex opère. Les règles de l’agence sont rédigées de telle manière qu’elles lui permettent de ne pas avoir à rendre de comptes. Cependant, nous constatons de petits pas vers un changement dans cette direction, par exemple avec l’implication active du bureau du Médiateur européen.

    Comment la société civile peut-elle faire pression sur l’UE pour que celle-ci étende son engagement en faveur des droits humains aux migrants et aux réfugiés, et comment peut-elle encourager les États membres à respecter leurs droits ?

    L’un des moyens que les membres du BVMN ont trouvé pour unir des forces multiples et faire entendre leurs voix sur des demandes clés est de construire des réseaux transfrontaliers. Nous sommes convaincus que l’implication active de la société civile dans chaque zone frontalière, pays et village peut faire une réelle différence quant à l’influence des citoyens. Il est très important de parler haut et fort des droits des réfugiés et des migrants. Il est également important de relier une variété de luttes qui sont fortement interconnectées et se déroulent au-delà des frontières, comme les luttes liées au changement climatique et aux droits des femmes.

    L’espace civique en Croatie est classé « rétréci » par leCIVICUS Monitor.

    Contactez le Centre d’études sur la paix (CPS) via sonsite web ou sa pageFacebook, et suivez@CMSZagreb sur Twitter.
    Contactez le Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN) sur sonsite web ou sa pageFacebook, et suivez@Border_Violence sur Twitter. 
  • MIGRATION: ‘The spread of COVID-19 is no excuse to confront vulnerable people with more violence’

    CIVICUS speaks with Maddalena Avon, project coordinator at the Centre for Peace Studies (CPS) about the situation of migrants and refugees in Europe under the pandemic and the ways in which civil society is responding to increasing border pushbacks from hostile European governments.

    CPS is a civil society organisation (CSO) that promotes non-violence and social change through education, research, advocacy, campaigning and activism. Founded in 1996, it works in three areas: asylum, integration and human security; peace education and non-violence affirmation; and combating inequalities. CPS is an active member of the Border Violence Monitoring Network, an independent network of CSOs based mostly in the Balkans and Greece, monitoring human rights violations at the external borders of the European Union and advocating to stop the violence against people on the move.

    Maddalena Avon

    What have been the key trends in migration in Europe, and specifically in the Balkans, under the pandemic?

    The landscape of asylum access has changed drastically since pandemic restrictions came into force. The Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN) had already reported on asylum as an eroded set of rights, but due process for international protection claims has been further challenged in recent months under the health emergency.

    Firstly, persistent pushbacks from borders continue to deny people access to claim international protection, with states performing collective expulsion. Secondly, government decisions to pause or close asylum offices with no effective alternative or remedy have placed refugees and other migrants in an effective limbo and at risk of pushback. Accordingly, the development of COVID-19 measures has allowed countries such as Croatia, Greece and Hungary to further restrict internationally mandated access to protection.

    In the midst of the escalating COVID-19 outbreak, the European Union (EU) launched its Joint Action Plan for Human Rights. However, the intention of this communication exhibits acute divergence from the reality on the ground. Most notably, violations of fundamental rights continue by EU member states and non-EU countries that have various EU agreements on migration, asylum and border security, alongside funded camp systems. Rather than assisting vulnerable communities in this precarious period, policy and guidance have allowed the strengthening of borders across a majority of member states to erode further the rights to asylum, due process and humane treatment.

    According to a recent report by the BVMN, in March and April 2020 Slovenia saw a decrease in the number of irregular border crossings compared to the first two months of 2021 and the same period in 2019, and this was reflected in the much lower number of people detained at police stations due to irregular border crossings. The trend of collective expulsions to Croatia, however, remained consistently high. In early 2020, during the COVID-19 outbreak and subsequent restrictions, Slovenia continued to systematically deny asylum rights and used its readmission agreement with Croatia – which allows it to hand people over to the Croatian police if there is proof that they illegally crossed the border within the last 48 hours – to deport large numbers of people, although the readmission agreement does not apply if the person has asked for asylum or is a potential asylum seeker. It has continued to do so despite full knowledge of the high risk of torture and further illegal pushback to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    In Croatia, as elsewhere, the pandemic has changed many things, but some aspects, such as its pushback regime, have unfortunately stayed the same. The only difference is that these violent collective expulsions now attract less attention, as all eyes are on the pandemic and human rights monitors have not been allowed in the field due to health restrictions. Pushbacks and violence at borders have persisted: in one case out of the hundreds documented by the BVMN, a group including a severely injured person and a minor was beaten with batons by Croatian officers, who also burnt their clothes, and the group was pushed back into Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    A relatively new development in pushback practices is the tagging of groups with orange spray paint, as reported by No Name Kitchen, a grassroots organisation and member of the BVMN that provides direct assistance to people on the move in border towns along the Balkan Route. Chain pushbacks from Slovenia via Croatia, with migrants being sent back the same way they came, have also continued.

    Reports of increased brutality during pushbacks are worrying due to the increased autonomy that state authorities have gained under the pandemic. Pushbacks are illegal and the spread of COVID-19 is no excuse to confront vulnerable people with even more violence.

    How are the CPS and the BVMN responding to these trends?

    The value of the work done by the BVMN lies in the interconnection of a variety of methods: field work, including trustful contact with people in border areas, testimony collection and advocacy work with clear demands being presented to institutions to hold them accountable for certain actions. Legal work is also essential, when people who have survived human rights violations want to seek justice. Each of the BVMN’s partners has its own strength in one or more of these working methods, and our collective strength is to combine all of them with a comprehensive approach.

    Within the network, CPS conducts research that feeds into our awareness-raising and advocacy efforts on access to the asylum system, protection of refugees’ human rights, illegal conduct of the police, the criminalisation of solidarity and integration, with a focus on employment and education.

    On integration, two of our big successes has been the Danube Compass, a web tool including all information relevant to the integration of refugees and migrants into Croatian society, and our non-formal education programme for asylum seekers, Let’s Talk about Society, which introduces our new community members to Croatian society and institutions, informs them of their rights and encourages their active participation in society.

    Within the network, CPS is a strong legal actor, as we have so far filed 12 criminal complaints against unknown perpetrators in police uniforms. Through strategic litigation, we prevented an extradition and succeeded in filing two lawsuits against the Republic of Croatia at the European Court of Human Rights. As a result of our advocacy, several EU and international institutions, including the United Nations Refugee Agency, started questioning and condemning the practices of the Croatian authorities.

    As a consequence of our public exposure of illegal practices towards refugees, we experienced a lot of pressure, and were banned from entering and working in asylum centres. This made our work more difficult but has not compromised our autonomy.

    Do you see any progress in holding Frontex, the European border agency, accountable for its failure to protect human rights?

    Frontex has faced severe allegations of human rights violations coming from different actors and institutions, and civil society has come together around multiple campaigns and actions on the matter, including #DefundFrontex. Supported by 22 CSOs and networks, including the BVMN, this campaign calls for the agency to be defunded and its budget redirected towards building a government-led and funded European civil sea rescue programme.

    The main challenge is that Frontex operates in a grey legal zone and is perceived to have no responsibility for its actions – responsibility always lies with the member state in which Frontex operates. The agency’s rules are made in a way that allows for it to be largely unaccountable. However, we are seeing small steps towards a change in that regard, for example with the active engagement of the European Ombudsman.

    How can civil society put pressure on the EU so that its commitment to human rights extends to migrants and refugees, and how can it encourage member states to respect their rights?

    One of the ways that BVMN members found to bring together multiple strengths and be louder on key demands is the building of transborder networks. We believe that the active involvement of civil society in each border area, country and village can make a real difference on the public’s influence. Being loud on the rights of refugees and migrants is extremely important. It’s also important to connect a variety of struggles that are highly interconnected and take place across borders, such as struggles on climate change and women’s rights.

    Civic space in Croatia is rated ‘narrowed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
    Get in touch with the Centre for Peace Studies through itswebsite orFacebook page, and follow@CMSZagreb on Twitter.
    Get in touch with the Border Violence Monitoring Network through itswebsite orFacebook page, and follow@Border_Violence on Twitter. 
  • More must be done to ensure women in civil society are protected

    Arabic

    Twenty-five years since the ratification of the Beijing Platform for Action, and a year since women across the world participated in the Women's Global Strike - gender justice is still not a reality for most women. Despite mass mobilisations globally with women at the forefront, and despite numerous campaigns and policy interventions orchestrated by women civil society leaders, activists and lawyers, women across the world struggle to achieve full equality.
  • More must be done to ensure women in civil society are protected

    CIVICUS' Chief Programmes Officer, Mandeep Tiwana, participated in the 65th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW 65) intersessional dialogue on building alliances for women's full and effective participation in public life. Watch the discussion below:

    During CSW 65, 290 organisations call for protection of women's civic freedoms to enhance their role in public life

    Arabic

    Twenty-five years since the ratification of the Beijing Platform for Action, and a year since women across the world participated in the Women's Global Strike - gender justice is still not a reality for most women. Despite mass mobilisations globally with women at the forefront, and despite numerous campaigns and policy interventions orchestrated by women civil society leaders, activists and lawyers, women across the world struggle to achieve full equality.
  • MYANMAR : « Les partis d'opposition se plaignent que le corps électoral censure leur discours »

    Cape DiamondCIVICUS s'entretient avec le journaliste lauréat Cape Diamond (Pyae Sone Win) au sujet des prochaines élections au Myanmar. Cape est un journaliste multimédia basé au Myanmar qui s’intéresse au domaine des droits humains, des crises et des conflits. Il travaille actuellement de manière indépendante pour l'Associated Press (AP). Il a assuré une couverture critique de la crise des réfugiés rohingyas et a travaillé avec de nombreux médias internationaux, dont Al Jazeera, ABC News et CBS. Il a également contribué au documentaire lauréat du BAFTA,Myanmar’s Killing Fields, et au filmThe Rohingya Exodus, médaillé d'or au Festival du film de New York.

    Prévues pour le 8 novembre 2020, ces élections seront les premières depuis 2015, date à laquelle elles ont abouti à une victoire écrasante de la Ligue nationale pour la démocratie (LND), et ne seront que les deuxièmes élections compétitives depuis 1990, date à laquelle la victoire écrasante de la LND a été annulée par l’armée.

    Quel est l'état des libertés civiles et de la société civile à l'approche des élections ?

    La situation de la liberté d'expression est très préoccupante. Au fil des années, des journalistes et des militants des droits de l'homme au Myanmar ont fait l'objet d'accusations pénales en raison de leur travail. Des lois restrictives, telles que la loi sur les télécommunications, la loi sur les associations illicites, la loi sur les secrets officiels et les dispositions du code pénal relatives à la diffamation, continuent d'être utilisées pour poursuivre les militants et les journalistes. La loi sur les défilés et rassemblements pacifiques a également été utilisée contre les manifestants.

    De nombreux partis politiques se sont plaints du fait que la Commission électorale de l'Union (CEU), l'organe électoral, a censuré des messages devant être diffusés à la télévision nationale avant les élections. Par exemple, Ko Ko Gyi, président du parti populaire, a déclaré que les changements apportés par la CEU dans son discours de campagne l'empêchaient d'exprimer pleinement la position politique de son parti sur les élections. Deux partis, le Parti démocratique pour une nouvelle société et la Force démocratique nationale, ont annulé leurs émissions électorales pour protester contre la censure.

    En même temps, les adversaires disent que le corps électoral est biaisé en faveur du parti au pouvoir, la LND, dirigé par Aung San Suu Kyi. C'est une question à laquelle nous devons être attentifs et dont nous devons parler afin de garantir des élections crédibles.

    Le corps électoral s’est-il rapproché de la société civile ?

    J'ai entendu dire que l'actuel CEU n'a pas cherché activement à établir un lien avec la société civile. Le CEU a d'abord interdit à l'Alliance du peuple pour des élections crédibles (APEC), l'un des plus grands groupes de surveillance des élections du pays, de surveiller les élections. La CEU a accusé l'APEC de ne pas être enregistrée en vertu de la loi régissant les organisations de la société civile et de recevoir des fonds de sources internationales. Bien que la CEU l'ait finalement autorisée à fonctionner, l'organisation éprouve des difficultés à le faire en raison des restrictions récemment imposées à cause de la COVID-19.

    Quelles sont les principales questions autour desquelles la campagne s'articulera ?

    La pandémie de la COVID-19 et la guerre civile en cours dans le pays sont nos principaux problèmes pour le moment. Il est très clair que le parti au pouvoir et le gouvernement ne prêtent pas suffisamment attention à la situation des minorités dans les régions qui souffrent de la guerre civile.

    Il est inquiétant que le pays traverse une pandémie, dont je pense qu'il n'a pas la capacité suffisante pour y faire face. Au 29 septembre 2020, nous avons eu un total de 11 000 cas signalés et 284 décès dus à la COVID-19. L'augmentation des infections au cours des dernières semaines est inquiétante, puisque nous n'avions eu qu'environ 400 cas confirmés en août. Je crains que la situation ne permette aux gens d'aller voter aux élections en toute sécurité.

    Plus de 20 partis politiques ont envoyé des demandes au corps électoral pour reporter les élections en raison de la pandémie, mais celles-ci ont été rejetées. Le parti au pouvoir n'est pas prêt à reporter les élections.

    Est-il possible de développer une campagne « normale » dans ce contexte ?

    Je ne pense pas qu'il soit possible d'avoir des rassemblements de campagne normaux comme ceux des dernières élections, celles de 2015, car nous sommes en pleine pandémie. Le gouvernement a pris plusieurs mesures pour lutter contre la propagation de la maladie, notamment l'interdiction de se réunir. Les partis politiques ne peuvent pas faire campagne dans des zones qui sont en situation de semi-confinement.

    Les grandes villes, telles que Yangon et sa région métropolitaine, ainsi que certaines municipalités de Mandalay, sont en semi-confinement, dans le cadre d'un programme que le gouvernement a appelé « Restez à la maison ». Au même temps, l'ensemble de l'État de Rakhine, qui connaît une guerre civile, est également en semi-confinement. J'ai bien peur que les habitants de la zone de guerre civile ne puissent pas aller voter.

    Pour s'adresser à leur public, les candidats utilisent à la fois les réseaux sociaux et les médias traditionnels. Toutefois, comme je l'ai déjà souligné, certains partis de l'opposition ont été censurés par la CSU. Certains membres de l'opposition ont dénoncé le traitement inéquitable de la CEU et du gouvernement, tandis que le parti au pouvoir utilise son pouvoir pour accroître sa popularité. Cela va clairement nuire aux chances électorales de l'opposition.

    Quels sont les défis spécifiques auxquels sont confrontés les candidats dans l'État de Rakhine ?

    Étant donné que tout l'État de Rakhine est soumis à des restrictions en raison de la COVID-19, les candidats ne peuvent pas faire campagne personnellement. C'est pourquoi ils font généralement campagne sur les réseaux sociaux. En même temps, dans de nombreuses municipalités de l'État de Rakhine, une coupure du service Internet a été imposée de façon prolongée en raison des combats continus entre l'armée arakanienne et les forces militaires. Je crains que les gens là-bas ne puissent pas obtenir suffisamment d'informations sur les élections.

    Le gouvernement du Myanmar utilise également la loi discriminatoire de 1982 sur la citoyenneté et la loi électorale pour priver les Rohingyas de leurs droits et les empêcher de se présenter aux élections. Les autorités électorales ont empêché le leader du Parti de la démocratie et des droits humains (PDDH) dirigé par les Rohingyas, Kyaw Min, de se présenter aux élections. Kyaw Min a été disqualifié avec deux autres candidats du PDDH parce que ses parents n'auraient pas été citoyens, comme l'exige la loi électorale. C'est l'un des nombreux outils utilisés pour opprimer le peuple Rohingya.

    En octobre, la CEU a lancé une application pour smartphone qui a été critiquée pour l'utilisation d'un label dérogatoire en référence aux musulmans rohingyas. L'application mVoter2020, qui vise à sensibiliser les électeurs, désigne au moins deux candidats de l'ethnie rohingya comme des « Bengalis », ce qui laisse entendre qu'ils sont des immigrants du Bangladesh, même si la plupart des Rohingyas vivent au Myanmar depuis des générations. Ce label est rejeté par de nombreux Rohingyas. De plus, aucun des plus d'un million de réfugiés Rohingyas au Bangladesh, ni des centaines de milliers de personnes dispersées dans d'autres pays, ne pourra voter.

    L'espace civique au Myanmar est décrit comme « répressif » par leCIVICUS Monitor.
    Suivez@cape_diamond sur Twitter.
  • MYANMAR: ‘Opposition parties complain that the election body censors their messaging'

    Cape DiamondCIVICUS speaks to award-winning journalist Cape Diamond (Pyae Sone Win) about the upcoming elections in Myanmar. Cape is a multimedia journalist based in Myanmar, covering issues of human rights, crisis and conflict. Currently freelancing for the Associated Press (AP), he has provided critical coverage during the Rohingya crisis and contributed to numerous international outlets, including Al Jazeera, ABC News and CBS. He also contributed to the BAFTA Award-winning documentaryMyanmar’s Killing Fields and New York Film Festival gold medal award-winner The Rohingya Exodus.

     

    Scheduled on 8 November 2020, the election will be Myanmar’s first since 2015, which resulted in a landslide victory for the National League for Democracy (NLD), and only the second competitive election since 1990, when the military annulled the NLD’s overwhelming victory.

    What is the situation for civic freedoms and civil society ahead of the elections?

    The situation for the freedom of speech is very concerning. Over the years, journalists and rights activists in Myanmar have been criminally charged for their work. Restrictive laws, including the Telecommunications Law, the Unlawful Associations Act, the Official Secrets Act and defamation provisions in the Penal Code, continue to be used to prosecute activists and journalists. The Peaceful Assembly and Procession Law has been used against those protesting.

    Many political parties have raised complaints that the Union Election Commission (UEC), the electoral body, has censored the messages that are set for broadcast on national TV ahead of the elections. For example, Ko Ko Gyi, chairman of the People's Party, said that the edits that the UEC made to his election campaign speech prevent him from airing the party's full political stance ahead of the elections. Two parties – the Democratic Party for a New Society and the National Democratic Force – cancelled their election broadcasts in protest against censorship.

    At the same time, critics say that the electoral body is biased in favour of the ruling party, the NLD led by Aung San Suu Kyi. It’s something that we should keep our eyes on and speak out about to ensure credible elections.

    Has the electoral body engaged with civil society?

    I’ve been hearing that the current UEC is not that actively engaging with civil society. They initially barred the People’s Alliance for Credible Elections (PACE), one of the largest election monitoring groups in the country, from monitoring the election. The UEC accused PACE of not being registered under the law that applies to civil society organisations and of receiving funding from international sources. Even though the UEC subsequently allowed PACE to operate, the organisation is struggling to proceed due to the newly imposed COVID-19 restrictions.

    What are the main issues the campaign will revolve around?

    The COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing civil war across the country are the main issues for us at the moment. It’s very clear that the ruling party and the government are not paying enough attention to the situation of minorities in regions experiencing civil war. 

    It’s worrying that the country is undergoing a pandemic, which I believe it does not have enough capacity to handle. As of 29 September 2020, we have had a total of 11,000 reported cases and 284 deaths due to COVID-19. A surge of infections over the last few weeks has been worrying, as we only had around 400 confirmed cases in August. I am concerned about whether the environment will be safe for people to go out and vote on the election days. 

    More than 20 political parties have sent requests to the electoral body to postpone the elections due to the pandemic, but they were rejected. The ruling party is not willing to have the elections postponed.

    Will it be possible to have a ‘normal’ campaign in this context? 

    I don’t think it’s possible to have normal campaign rallies such as those of the previous election in 2015, because we are in a pandemic. The government has taken several measures to combat the spread of the disease, including orders against gatherings of people. Political parties are not allowed to organise their campaigns in semi-lockdown areas.

    Major cities like Yangon and the Yangon Region, as well as some townships in Mandalay, are under semi-lockdown, which the government calls the Stay-At-Home programme. At the same time, the whole of Rakhine State, which is experiencing civil war, is also on semi-lockdown. I am afraid people in the civil war zone will not be able to go out and vote.

    Candidates are using both mainstream and social media to reach their audiences. However, as noted earlier, some opposition parties have been censored by the UEC. Some opposition members have denounced unfair treatment by the UEC and the government, while the ruling party is using its power to expand its popularity. This will clearly harm the electoral chances of the opposition.

    What specific challenges do candidates face in Rakhine State?

    As the whole of Rakhine State is under COVID-19 restrictions, candidates are not able to campaign in person. Therefore, they are mostly campaigning on social media. At the same time, a long internet shutdown has been in place in many townships in Rakhine State, imposed due to ongoing fighting between the Arakan Army and the military. I am concerned about whether people will be able to get enough information around the elections.

    The Myanmar government is also using the discriminatory 1982 Citizenship Law and the Election Law to disenfranchise Rohingya people and block them from running for political office. Election officials barred Kyaw Min, head of the Rohingya-led Democracy and Human Rights Party (DHRP), from running. He was disqualified along with two other DHRP candidates because their parents were allegedly not citizens, as required by election law. This is one of the various tools used to oppress the Rohingya population.

    In October, the UEC released a smartphone app that was criticised over its use of a derogatory label for Rohingya Muslims. The mVoter2020 app, aimed at improving voter awareness, labels at least two candidates from the Rohingya ethnic group as ‘Bengali’, a term that implies they are immigrants from Bangladesh, although most have lived in Myanmar for generations. This label is rejected by many Rohingya people. Additionally, none of the one million Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh and another several hundred thousand dispersed in other countries will be allowed to vote.

    Civic space in Myanmar is rated as ‘repressed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.

    Follow@cape_diamond on Twitter.
  • MYANMAR: “Los partidos de oposición se quejan de que el organismo electoral censura su discurso”

    Cape DiamondCIVICUS conversa con el galardonado periodista Cape Diamond (Pyae Sone Win) acerca de las próximas elecciones en Myanmar. Cape es un periodista multimedia basado en Myanmar que cubre temas de derechos humanos, crisis y conflicto. Actualmente trabaja en forma independiente para Associated Press (AP). Ha cubierto críticamente la crisis de los refugiados rohingya y ha colaborado con numerosos medios internacionales, incluidos Al Jazeera, ABC News y CBS. También contribuyó al documental ganador del premio BAFTA,Myanmar’s Killing Fields, y al ganador de la medalla de oro en el Festival de Cine de Nueva York,The Rohingya Exodus.

     

    Programadas para el 8 de noviembre de 2020, estas elecciones serán las primeras desde 2015, cuando resultaron en una victoria aplastante para la Liga Nacional para la Democracia (LND), y serán apenas las segundas elecciones competitivas desde 1990, cuando la abrumadora victoria de la LND fue anulada por el ejército.

    ¿Cuál es la situación de las libertades cívicas y la sociedad civil en vísperas de las elecciones?

    La situación de la libertad de expresión es muy preocupante. A lo largo de los años, periodistas y activistas de derechos humanos de Myanmar han sufrido acusaciones penales a causa de su trabajo. Se siguen utilizando leyes restrictivas, como la Ley de Telecomunicaciones, la Ley de Asociaciones Ilícitas, la Ley de Secretos Oficiales y las disposiciones sobre difamación del Código Penal, para enjuiciar a activistas y periodistas. También se ha utilizado la Ley de Procesión y Reunión Pacífica contra los manifestantes.

    Muchos partidos políticos se han quejado de que la Comisión Electoral de la Unión (UEC), el órgano electoral, ha censurado los mensajes que emitirán en la televisión nacional antes de las elecciones. Por ejemplo, Ko Ko Gyi, presidente del Partido Popular, dijo que las modificaciones que hizo la UEC en su discurso de campaña le impiden expresar plenamente la postura política de su partido frente a las elecciones. Dos partidos, el Partido Democrático para una Nueva Sociedad y Fuerza Nacional Democrática, cancelaron sus transmisiones electorales en protesta por la censura.

    Al mismo tiempo, los críticos dicen que el órgano electoral está predispuesto a favor del partido gobernante, el NLD, que lidera Aung San Suu Kyi. Es un tema al que debemos estar atentos y sobre el cual tenemos que hablar para garantizar elecciones creíbles.

    ¿Ha habido acercamientos del órgano electoral a la sociedad civil?

    He escuchado que la actual UEC no ha buscado activamente un vínculo con la sociedad civil. La UEC inicialmente prohibió que la Alianza Popular para unas Elecciones Creíbles (PACE), uno de los grupos de monitoreo electoral más grandes del país, monitoreara las elecciones. La UEC acusó a la PACE de no estar registrada bajo la ley que rige a las organizaciones de la sociedad civil y de recibir financiamiento de fuentes internacionales. A pesar de que la UEC acabo permitiéndole operar, la organización está experimentando dificultades para hacerlo, debido a las restricciones recientemente impuestas a causa del COVID-19.

    ¿Cuáles son los principales temas en torno de los cuales girará la campaña?

    La pandemia de COVID-19 y la guerra civil en curso en el país son nuestros principales problemas en este momento. Está muy claro que el partido gobernante y el gobierno no están prestando suficiente atención a la situación de las minorías en las regiones que sufren la guerra civil.

    Es preocupante que el país esté atravesando una pandemia, que creo que no tiene suficiente capacidad para manejar. Al 29 de septiembre de 2020, hemos tenido un total de 11,000 casos reportados y 284 muertes a causa del COVID-19. El aumento de las infecciones en las últimas semanas ha sido preocupante, ya que en agosto solo tuvimos alrededor de 400 casos confirmados. Me preocupa que la situación sea segura para que la gente salga a votar en las elecciones.

    Más de 20 partidos políticos han enviado al órgano electoral solicitudes para que postergue las elecciones debido a la pandemia, pero fueron rechazadas. El partido gobernante no está dispuesto a posponer las elecciones.

    ¿Será posible desarrollar una campaña “normal” en este contexto?

    No creo que sea posible tener mítines de campaña normales como los de las elecciones pasadas, las de 2015, ya que estamos en plena pandemia. El gobierno ha tomado varias medidas para combatir la propagación de la enfermedad, entre ellas la prohibición de las reuniones de personas. Los partidos políticos no pueden hacer campaña en las áreas que están en situación de semi-confinamiento.

    Las principales ciudades, como Yangon y su región metropolitana, así como algunos municipios de Mandalay, están en semi-confinamiento, bajo un programa que el gobierno ha llamado “Quédate en casa”. Al mismo tiempo, todo el estado de Rakhine, que está experimentando la guerra civil, también se encuentra en semi-confinamiento. Me temo que la gente en la zona de guerra civil no pueda salir a votar.

    Para dirigirse a sus públicos, los candidatos utilizan tanto las redes sociales como los medios convencionales. Sin embargo, como señalé anteriormente, algunos partidos opositores han sido censurados por la UEC. Algunos integrantes de la oposición han denunciado un trato injusto por parte de la UEC y el gobierno, mientras que el partido gobernante está usando su poder para expandir su popularidad. Esto claramente perjudicará las chances electorales de la oposición.

    ¿Qué desafíos específicos enfrentan los candidatos en el estado de Rakhine?

    Como todo el estado de Rakhine está sujeto a restricciones por el COVID-19, los candidatos no pueden hacer campaña en forma presencial. Por lo tanto, en general realizan campañas en las redes sociales. Al mismo tiempo, en muchos municipios del estado de Rakhine ha habido un prolongado corte del servicio de Internet, impuesto a causa de los combates en curso entre el Ejército de Arakan y las fuerzas militares. Me preocupa que la gente allí no pueda obtener suficiente información en torno de las elecciones.

    El gobierno de Myanmar también está utilizando la discriminatoria Ley de Ciudadanía de 1982 y la Ley Electoral para privar de sus derechos a las personas rohingya y evitar que se postulen para competir por cargos políticos. Los funcionarios electorales impidieron la presentación de la candidatura de Kyaw Min, líder del Partido de la Democracia y los Derechos Humanos (DHRP), liderado por personas rohingya. Kyaw Min fue descalificado junto con otros dos candidatos del DHRP porque supuestamente sus padres no eran ciudadanos, como lo exige la ley electoral. Esta es una de las diversas herramientas que se utilizan para oprimir a la población rohingya.

    En octubre, la UEC lanzó una aplicación para teléfonos inteligentes que fue criticada por utilizar un rótulo despectivo en referencia a las personas musulmanas rohingya. La aplicación mVoter2020, destinada a generar conciencia entre los votantes, se refiere a por lo menos dos candidatos del grupo étnico rohingya como “bengalíes”, lo cual sugiere que se trata de inmigrantes procedentes de Bangladesh, pese a que la mayoría de las personas rohingya ha vivido en Myanmar durante generaciones. Esta etiqueta es rechazada por muchos rohingya. Además, no podrá votar ninguno de los más de un millón de rohingya refugiados en Bangladesh, ni tampoco los cientos de miles dispersos en otros países.

    El espacio cívico enMyanmar es calificado como “represivo” por elCIVICUS Monitor.

    Siga a@cape_diamond en Twitter. 
  • Myanmar: Continued crackdown on civil society undermines efforts to address COVID-19

    Statement at the 44th Session of the UN Human Rights Council

    Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar

    CIVICUS welcomes the Special Rapporteur’s update, and looks forward to our future engagement.

    This is a critical time in Myanmar, where a crackdown on expression, peaceful assembly and access to information is a barrier to accountability and undermines the country’s efforts to address the COVID-19 pandemic. Individuals have criminalised for speaking out, reporting or protesting again human rights violations.

    Members of the Peacock Generation, a slam poetry troupe, who were convicted under the Telecommunications Act and Section 505(a) of the Penal Code remain in prison for their satirical criticism of the government. The Peaceful Assembly and Procession Law has been used against those protesting the internet blackout in Rakhine and Chin states. These laws, and countless others, make up the repressive legal framework used against independent journalists and human rights defenders who speak out on crimes perpetrated by the government.

    The report of the IIMM presented during the 42nd Session of this council said that Myanmar’s future depends on the clear demonstration that its international crimes will not be tolerated. It also depends on those in Myanmar who speak out on violations and advocate for positive change being listened to, rather than persecuted. We call on the Myanmar government to do so, and on the international community to stand by these activists.

    We ask the Special Rapporteur: what are your priorities for your time in this mandate, and how do you see the role of an open civic space in achieving accountability? Finally, how can civil society support you in your work?

    Civic space in Kuwait is currently rated as Repressed by the CIVICUS Monitor

    Current council members:

    Afghanistan, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Eritrea, Fiji, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Libya, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mexico, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, Nigeria, Poland, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Senegal, Slovakia, Somalia, Sudan, Spain, Togo, Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela

    Civic space ratings from the CIVICUS Monitor
    OPEN NARROWED OBSTRUCTED  REPRESSED CLOSED

     

Página 9 de 14

CONTACTA CON NOSOTROS

CANALES DIGITALES

SUDÁFRICA
25  Owl Street, 6th Floor
Johannesburgo,
Sudáfrica,
2092
Tel: +27 (0)11 833 5959
Fax: +27 (0)11 833 7997

UN HUB: GINEBRA
11 Avenue de la Paix
Ginebra
Suiza
CH-1202
Tel: +41.79.910.34.28

UN HUB: NUEVA YORK
CIVICUS, c/o We Work
450 Lexington Ave
Nueva York
NY 10017
Estados Unidos