Tres mujeres excepcionales, candidatas al Premio Martin Ennals 2020

Tres mujeres excepcionales, candidatas al Premio Martin Ennals 2020

Las finalistas del Premio Martin Ennals 2020 son tres mujeres excepcionales – Huda Al-Sarari, Norma Ledezma y Sizani Ngubane – reflejo del lugar preponderante que actualmente ocupan las mujeres en la defensa de los derechos humanos. La CIJ es miembro del jurado.

En Yemen, Huda Al-Sarari denuncia la existencia de prisiones secretas y numerosos casos de tortura.

En México, Norma Ledezma lucha contra los feminicidios y casos de desaparición.

En Sudáfrica, Sizani Ngubane promueve el acceso de las mujeres a la educación y a la tierra.

Tres mujeres candidatas: un estreno

El Premio Martin Ennals recompensa cada año a defensores o defensoras de los derechos humanos procedentes del mundo entero que se distinguen por su profundo compromiso, un compromiso que a menudo pone en peligro su vida.

Para la edición de 2020, el jurado ha elegido por primera vez como candidatas a tres mujeres que defienden los derechos fundamentales de sus comunidades en contextos delicados.

«La Fundación Martin Ennals se enorgullece de rendir homenaje al valiente trabajo de tres mujeres. La selección de nuestro jurado para el Premio Martin Ennals 2020 refleja el importante impulso mundial de individuos que, sea cual sea su género, trabajan por el respeto de los derechos humanos, y de los derechos de las mujeres en particular», señala Isabel de Sola, directora de la Fundación Martin Ennals.

«Las finalistas del Premio Martin Ennals 2020 trabajan en continentes distintos, pero las tres tienen en común su resistencia, su determinación, su enorme rigor y, por último, el impacto positivo y concreto de su trabajo», subraya Hans Thoolen, presidente del jurado.

Las finalistas

En Yemen, en un conflicto que causa estragos desde 2005, Huda Al-Sarari, abogada yemení, ha desvelado la existencia de varios centros de detención secretos en los que se han cometido las peores violaciones de derechos humanos: torturas, desapariciones e incluso ejecuciones sumarias.

En Sudáfrica, las mujeres se enfrentan a una discriminación que se traduce en una violencia de género muy extendida. En las comunidades rurales, las mujeres a menudo se ven expropiadas de sus tierras, y se las priva de la educación y del acceso a la justicia. Sizani Ngubane fundó una organización de más de 50.000 mujeres procedentes de zonas rurales del país y desde hace más de 40 años lucha con éxito para que se reconozcan sus derechos.

En México, con el Estado de derecho desmoronándose, la población civil paga el elevado precio de la violencia y la impunidad generalizadas. Las mujeres son las principales víctimas de ese desmoronamiento: cada año se cometen más de 3.500 feminicidios. Norma Ledezma, madre de una de las víctimas, se dedica a acompañar a las familias del estado de Chihuahua en su acceso a la justicia.

Los finalistas han sido seleccionados por las organizaciones representadas en el jurado: la CIJ, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Human Rights First, International Federation for Human Rights, World Organisation Against Torture, Front Line Defenders, EWDE Germany, International Service for Human Rights y HURIDOCS.

Velada de entrega del Premio, el 19 de febrero de 2020 El Premio Martin Ennals 2020 será otorgado a una de las tres finalistas el 19 de febrero de 2020 durante una velada pública y retransmitida en livestream. El evento es organizado por la Ciudad de Ginebra que, fiel a su compromiso en favor de los derechos humanos, respalda el Premio desde hace numerosos años.

Contacto

Olivier van Bogaert, Director de comunicación de la CIJ, miembro del jurado, t: +41 22 979 38 08 ; e: olivier.vanbogaert(a)icj.org

Universal-MEA2020bios-News-2019-SPA (biografías completas de las finalistas, en PDF)

Eswatini: ICJ launches video clip on sexual and gender-based violence

Eswatini: ICJ launches video clip on sexual and gender-based violence

The ICJ just launched a 15 minute documentary showing contributions by the ICJ and local human rights defenders in bringing the Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence (SODV) Act to pass in Mbabane, Eswatini.

The documentary was launched at an SODV Act media training held with the Cooperation for the Development of Emerging Countries (Cospe) and the Editor’s Forum. The training was aimed at taking a human rights-based approach to understanding the Act, following pushback from those who have expressed the view that parts of the Act are an as an affront to Swazi tradition and culture.

In an effort to combat the various challenges presented by SGBV, the Kingdom of Eswatini introduced the Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence (SODV) Act in 2018. The Act complies with its commitments under international and regional human rights law to fight the scourge of SGBV in the country.

The documentary highlights the way in which the Act is expected to be instrumental in combatting the scourge of sexual and gender-based violence, as well as areas in which it has been contested. The documentary was well-received by participants of the training and opened up an engaging dialogue about its usefulness.

The media is at the forefront of informing public discourse about the Act and it is hoped that this training provided some much-needed clarity around the Act.

Watch the documentary:

Contact

Khanyo  Farisè (Legal Associate):           e: Nokukhanya.Farise(a)icj.org

Shaazia Ebrahim (Media Officer):          e: shaazia.ebrahim(a)icj.org

Nepal: 13 Years On, No Justice for Conflict Victims – Law, Commissions to Investigate Atrocities Fail International Standards

Nepal: 13 Years On, No Justice for Conflict Victims – Law, Commissions to Investigate Atrocities Fail International Standards

Nepal has made no real progress on questions of justice, truth and reparations for victims of gross human rights violations and abuses during its 10-year conflict, the ICJ, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (HRW) and TRIAL International said today.

The Comprehensive Peace Agreement to end the war was signed on November 21, 2006.

While two commissions have been set up to address conflict-era atrocities, they have not been effective and impunity and denial of access to justice to victims remain prevalent. The four human rights organizations are particularly concerned about the recent moves that suggest that the government will go forward with the appointing of commissioners without making necessary reforms to the legal framework.

“Last week marked the 13th anniversary of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement that ended the conflict in Nepal. It is astonishing that so little progress has been made in responding to the clearly articulated concerns and demands of conflict victims,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia-Pacific Director. “These demands have included a transparent and consultative process for the appointment of commissioners, and a genuine good-faith effort by political leaders and lawmakers to address serious weaknesses in the existing legal framework.”

On November 18, a five-member committee formed by the government to recommend names for commissioners to be appointed to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission on the Investigation of Enforced Disappearances published a list of candidates. Concerns have been raised by victims and civil society that the government will simply re-appoint past commissioners or make political appointments that will not be adequately impartial and independent.

“It is deeply disappointing that the government has repeatedly attempted to appoint the commissioners without adequate consultation and transparency . The commissions will not gain the trust of the victims and the international community if the political parties continue to interfere in the appointment process,” said Biraj Patnaik, South Asia Director at Amnesty International.

Importantly, the move suggests that the commissions will be re-constituted without amending the legal framework governing the transitional justice process and ensuring its compliance with Nepal’s international human rights law obligations, as directed by Nepal’s Supreme Court and demanded by civil society and victims.

Victims and civil society organizations have issued public statement making it clear that they oppose any appointments prior to the amendment of the legal framework. Notably, the National Human Rights Commission, in its statement commemorating 13th Anniversary of CPA, stated that “…the commission will not support any decision, work or activities that might hurt the sensitivity of the conflict victims…”.

“The government’s move has not only undermined victims’ role in the transitional justice process, but has also once again brought into question its commitment to uphold its international law obligations and ensuring justice for conflict-era crimes,” said Tomás Ananía, TRIAL International’s Nepal Program Manager.

The ICJ, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and TRIAL International have repeatedly expressed concern that effective transitional justice mechanisms require strong legal foundations consistent with international law and good practices, and the political will to address the concerns of victims of the conflict. All four organisations reiterated their calls to amend the the 2014 Transitional Justice Act to make it consistent with the Supreme Court’s rulings and international human rights standards, as well as for the initiation of a genuine consultative and transparent process for the appointment of commissioners.

Concerns raised about the existing, and proposed, legal frameworks include: disparities between the definitions of specific crimes under international law and human rights obligations and violations under national, and international law; inadequate provisions to ensure that serious crimes under international law are subject to criminal accountability (including punishment proportionate to the seriousness of the crimes); and a reliance on compensation at the expense of other forms of reparation and remedy for conflict survivors and their families.

Under the principle of universal jurisdiction states may make it possible for their domestic criminal justice system to investigate and prosecute crimes such as torture, committed by any person, anywhere in the world.

This means that a citizen of any country, including Nepal, suspected of such crimes faces the risk of arrest and prosecution for these crimes in countries that apply universal jurisdiction. This is more likely if the Nepali authorities do not appear able and willing to prosecute those responsible for such crimes, the organizations said.

“After initial pledges to ensure truth, justice, and reparations for conflict victims, it appears that the government is once again  determined to protect those responsible for the crimes,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The international community should remind Nepal that whitewashing egregious crimes will not help to dodge universal jurisdiction.”

Contact:

Download the complete press-release in English and Nepali. (PDF)

Translate »