An Interview with Silvia Pimentel

WHRnet: What were your personal and political motives for participating in the election for the CEDAW Committee? Why do you believe that this process and the committee itself are important for the women's movement and for the construction of human rights in general?

SP: As a feminist, since the 1970s I have been evaluating the CEDAW Convention, the strongest and broadest international legal instrument for women. It is the framework for our fight for our human rights. It is a driving force for laws and public policies against the discrimination against women that is thousands of years old and for equality and equity of all in the family, in society and in the state.

It is true that the issue of violence is not expressly established in the convention, but in 1992, the CEDAW Committee made up for this omission with Resolution 19, in my opinion.

As one of the founders and as a member of CLADEM-Comité Latino Americano y del Caribe para la Defensa de los Derechos de las Mujeres-whose mission is to contribute from a woman's perspective to the creation of real democracies with social justice, free from discrimination, with the full exercise of human rights, I see CEDAW as a great paradigm, our international bill of rights.

It is an honor to be on the CEDAW Committee and it is specifically an extraordinary opportunity to share in an international dialogue, and what's more, to be able to influence and collaborate positively from my feminist experience in Brasil and Latin America. It is a great opportunity to interconnect local, regional and international efforts.

I'm also one of the founders of IWRAW-International Women's Rights Action Watch-together with Arvonne Frazer of the University of Minnesota and also Rebecca Cook and others.

From 1985 to 1996, I participated in IWRAW's efforts, which was meeting at the same time as the CEDAW Committee. IWRAW was the first international NGO to do the political work of monitoring the CEDAW Committee's work from the perspective of the women's movement in civil society. IWRAW devised and created the strategy of alternative reports (shadow reports) to support and serve as critical reference for the CEDAW Committee's analysis of the country reports that must be presented every four years.

In Latin America and the Caribbean, for several years, CLADEM has been promoting reports and has created an interesting and useful manual to promote monitoring, not only of CEDAW, but also the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the Political Rights Covenant) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the Economic Rights Covenant).

WHRNET: Do you believe that the committee practices a feminist vision? If not, what would be needed to include a feminist vision within the work of the committee?

SP: I am happy and gratified to be elected to the CEDAW Committee. I'm taking this position of work and expertise with a critical and constructive view, but at the same time, with a lot of respect for the committee's efforts. The members' profiles are diverse and interesting, but many do not have political experience nor have been affiliated with the women's movement, and for this reason, although prepared and trained intellectually, they often do not have the understanding to grasp the complexity and economic, social, cultural, political and legal contradictions that women throughout the world experience.

It cannot be said that the committee practices a feminist vision. Therefore, the growing presence of feminists is progress. We will hope and work so that Alda Facio from Costa Rica can be added to our feminists in the 2006 election, since we are still the minority, and that many others can be added too!

I'm going to bring attention to the polemical issues of sexuality and reproduction because the CEDAW Committee's recommendations, although there have been advances, they need to advance much more on sexual and reproductive rights.

WHRNET: What are the lessons you learned from participating in the election of experts to the CEDAW Committee? Please explain them and add criticisms you consider pertinent.

SP: I was in NY three times with the Brasil Mission at the United Nations in meetings with diplomats from 120 of the States Parties to the CEDAW Convention. Through this rich experience of dialogue I learned many lessons.

The issue of women's status is gaining spaces and recognition, and the existence of the CEDAW Convention, the CEDAW Committee and its election mechanisms function as a fundamental tool. Now with the Optional Protocol the committee's work will be increasingly broad and efficient.

The elections represent a very complex and difficult effort. In the larger political game of world power, I believe that the most decisive factor is which country presents the candidacy because the countries make agreements and 'negotiate' between themselves and the profile of the candidate for the committee is not exclusively considered.

I learned that third world countries, especially, are not satisfied with the current composition of the committee and feel underrepresented. I heard criticisms that the experts from the first world do not represent women throughout the world since they live a very different reality, in more favorable and very different conditions from those of the millions of miserable and excluded women of the world.

I relearned that listen a lot and talk less but firmly, is very useful. That respectful dialogue can be more strategic than confrontation; that we must always begin to build our arguments by seeking and recognizing positive and common points between us and our spokespeople. And that, only after establishing something in common and a reciprocal reliability, as little as it may be, is it possible to establish a substantive dialogue that is an exchange.

I am a law professor, I have participated in the constitutional process and the process of creating a Civil Code, I was in the catalyzing group for a egalitarian Penal Code and a Special Law on Domestic and Family Violence Against Women; these were concrete aspects of my political affiliation that were given a lot of consideration by the spokespeople. But it's important to say that the enthusiasm and force with which the Brasilian diplomats presented my political participation for gender equality in my country were crucial.

In conclusion, I believe I can say that the majority of people from the 120 countries with whom we had meetings are aware of the issue of de jure and de facto transformation in favor of the status of women. What many are lacking is the knowledge of how to work for it in their countries and they hope the CEDAW Committee can be helpful in some way.