WHRDs are self-identified women and lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LBTQI) people and others who defend rights and are subject to gender-specific risks and threats due to their human rights work and/or as a direct consequence of their gender identity or sexual orientation.
WHRDs are subject to systematic violence and discrimination due to their identities and unyielding struggles for rights, equality and justice.
The WHRD Program collaborates with international and regional partners as well as the AWID membership to raise awareness about these risks and threats, advocate for feminist and holistic measures of protection and safety, and actively promote a culture of self-care and collective well being in our movements.
Risks and threats targeting WHRDs
WHRDs are exposed to the same types of risks that all other defenders who defend human rights, communities, and the environment face. However, they are also exposed to gender-based violence and gender-specific risks because they challenge existing gender norms within their communities and societies.
By defending rights, WHRDs are at risk of:
Physical assault and death
Intimidation and harassment, including in online spaces
Judicial harassment and criminalization
Burnout
A collaborative, holistic approach to safety
We work collaboratively with international and regional networks and our membership
to raise awareness about human rights abuses and violations against WHRDs and the systemic violence and discrimination they experience
to strengthen protection mechanisms and ensure more effective and timely responses to WHRDs at risk
We work to promote a holistic approach to protection which includes:
emphasizing the importance of self-care and collective well being, and recognizing that what care and wellbeing mean may differ across cultures
documenting the violations targeting WHRDs using a feminist intersectional perspective;
promoting the social recognition and celebration of the work and resilience of WHRDs ; and
building civic spaces that are conducive to dismantling structural inequalities without restrictions or obstacles
Our Actions
We aim to contribute to a safer world for WHRDs, their families and communities. We believe that action for rights and justice should not put WHRDs at risk; it should be appreciated and celebrated.
Promoting collaboration and coordination among human rights and women’s rights organizations at the international level to strengthen responses concerning safety and wellbeing of WHRDs.
Supporting regional networks of WHRDs and their organizations, such as the Mesoamerican Initiative for WHRDs and the WHRD Middle East and North Africa Coalition, in promoting and strengthening collective action for protection - emphasizing the establishment of solidarity and protection networks, the promotion of self-care, and advocacy and mobilization for the safety of WHRDs;
Increasing the visibility and recognition of WHRDs and their struggles, as well as the risks that they encounter by documenting the attacks that they face, and researching, producing, and disseminating information on their struggles, strategies, and challenges:
Mobilizing urgent responses of international solidarity for WHRDs at risk through our international and regional networks, and our active membership.
Zita était une défenseure des droits des femmes de la région du Grand Kivu.
Elle a été la première directrice exécutive d’UWAKI, une organisation de femmes bien connue. Par son travail avec le Réseau des Femmes pour la Défense des Droits et la Paix (RFDP) et le Caucus des femmes du Sud-Kivu pour la paix, elle a consacré sa vie à rétablir la paix dans l'est de la RDC. Elle a très fermement dénoncé l'utilisation de la violence sexuelle comme arme de guerre.
En 2006, elle s'est présentée comme candidate aux premières élections démocratiques en RDC. Bien qu’elle n’ait pas gagné, elle a continué à défendre les droits des femmes et la communauté du Sud-Kivu se souvient d’elle avec affection.
Despite their rigidity in matters of doctrine and worldview, anti-rights actors have demonstrated an openness to building new kinds of strategic alliances, to new organizing techniques, and to new forms of rhetoric. As a result, their power in international spaces has increased.
There has been a notable evolution in the strategies of ultra conservative actors operating at this level. They do not only attempt to tinker at the edges of agreements and block certain language, but to transform the framework conceptually and develop alternative standards and norms, and avenues for influence.
Strategy 1: Training of UN delegates
Ultra conservative actors work to create and sustain their relationships with State delegates through regular training opportunities - such as the yearly Global Family Policy Forum - and targeted training materials.
These regular trainings and resources systematically brief delegates on talking points and negotiating techniques to further collaboration towards anti-rights objectives in the human rights system. Delegates also receive curated compilations of ‘consensus language’ and references to pseudo-scientific or statistical information to bolster their arguments.
The consolidated transmission of these messages explains in part why State delegates who take ultra-conservative positions in international human rights debates frequently do so in contradiction with their own domestic legislation and policies.
Strategy 2: Holding international convenings
Anti-rights actors’ regional and international web of meetings help create closer links between ultra conservative Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), States and State blocs, and powerful intergovernmental bodies. The yearly international World Congress of Families is one key example.
These convenings reinforce personal connections and strategic alliances, a key element for building and sustaining movements. They facilitate transnational, trans-religious and dynamic relationship-building around shared issues and interests, which leads to a more proactive approach and more holistic sets of asks at the international policy level on the part of anti-rights actors.
Strategy 3: Placing reservations on human rights agreements
States and State blocs have historically sought to undermine international consensus or national accountability under international human rights norms through reservations to human rights agreements, threatening the universal applicability of human rights.
The Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) has received by far the most reservations, most of which are based on alleged conflict with religious law. It is well-established international human rights law that evocations of tradition, culture or religion cannot justify violations of human rights, and many reservations to CEDAW are invalid as they are “incompatible with the object and purpose” of CEDAW. Nevertheless, reference to these reservations is continually used by States to dodge their human rights responsibilities.
‘Reservations’ to UN documents and agreements that are not formal treaties - such as Human Rights Council and General Assembly resolutions - are also on the rise.
Strategy 4: Creating a parallel human rights framework
In an alarming development, regressive actors at the UN have begun to co-opt existing rights standards and campaign to develop agreed language that is deeply anti-rights.
The aim is to create and then propagate language in international human rights spaces that validates patriarchal, hierarchical, discriminatory, and culturally relativist norms.
One step towards this end is the drafting of declarative texts, such as the World Family Declaration and the San Jose Articles, that pose as soft human rights law. Sign-ons are gathered from multiple civil society, state, and institutional actors; and they are then used a basis for advocacy and lobbying.
Strategy 5: Developing alternative ‘scientific’ sources
As part of a strategic shift towards the use of non-religious discourses, anti-rights actors have significantly invested in their own ‘social science’ think tanks. Given oxygen by the growing conservative media, materials from these think tanks are then widely disseminated by conservative civil society groups. The same materials are used as the basis for advocacy at the international human rights level.
While the goals and motivation of conservative actors derive from their extreme interpretations of religion, culture, and tradition, such regressive arguments are often reinforced through studies that claim intellectual authority. A counter-discourse is thus produced through a heady mix of traditionalist doctrine and social science.
Strategy 6: Mobilizing Youth
This is one of the most effective strategies employed by the religious right and represents a major investment in the future of anti-rights organizing.
Youth recruitment and leadership development, starting at the local level with churches and campuses, are a priority for many conservative actors engaged at the international policy level.
This strategy has allowed for infiltration of youth-specific spaces at the United Nations, including at the Commission on the Status of Women, and creates a strong counterpoint to progressive youth networks and organizations.
Key anti-rights strategies
Strategy 7: Defunding and delegitimizing human rights mechanisms
When it comes to authoritative expert mechanisms like the UN Special Procedures and Treaty Monitoring Bodies and operative bodies like the UN agencies, regressive groups realize their potential for influence is much lower than with political mechanisms[1].
In response, anti-rights groups spread the idea that UN agencies are ‘overstepping their mandate,’ that the CEDAW Committee and other Treaty Bodies have no authority to interpret their treaties, or that Special Procedures are partisan experts working outside of their mandate. Anti-rights groups have also successfully lobbied for the defunding of agencies such as the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).
This invalidation of UN mechanisms gives fuel to state impunity. Governments, when under international scrutiny, can defend their action on the basis that the reviewing mechanism is itself faulty or overreaching.
Strategy 8: Organizing online
Conservative non-state actors increasingly invest in social media and other online platforms to promote their activities, campaign, and widely share information from international human rights spaces.
The Spanish organization CitizenGo, for example, markets itself as the conservative version of Change.org, spearheading petitions and letter-writing campaigns. One recent petition, opposing the establishment of a UN international day on safe abortion, gathered over 172,000 signatures.
Overarching Trends:
Learning from the organizing strategies of feminists and other progressives.
Replicating and adapting successful national-level tactics for the international sphere.
Moving from an emphasis on ‘symbolic protest’ to becoming subversive system ‘insiders.’
By understanding the strategies employed by anti-rights actors, we can be more effective in countering them.
[1] The fora that are state-led, like the General Assembly, the Human Rights Council, and UN conferences like the Commission on the Status of Women and the Commission on Population and Development
« Andaiye » signifie « une fille revient à la maison » en swahili. Née Sandra Williams le 11 septembre 1942 à Georgetown, Guyane, Andaiye adopte ce nouveau nom en 1970 alors que le mouvement des Black Panthers balaie son pays et toute la région des Caraïbes.
Perçue comme une figure transformatrice sur les fronts de la lutte pour la libération et pour la liberté, Andaiye a été l’une des premières membres de l’Alliance du peuple travailleur (WPA), un parti socialiste en Guyane de lutte contre le régime autoritaire et participait activement à sa direction. Tout au long de sa vie, Andaiye a placé la justice pour la classe ouvrière et les droits des femmes vivant en milieu rural au centre de son action militante, et s’est battue pour l’élimination des obstacles ethniques entre les femmes indo-guyaniennes et celles afro-guyaniennes.
Andaiye fut l’une des membres fondatrices des Red Thread Women, une organisation de défense pour la juste rémunération du travail en soins réalisé par les femmes, en plus d’avoir travaillé à l’Université des Indes occidentales et avec l’organisation CARICOM. N’hésitant jamais à défier les gouvernements, elle a pointé du doigt les déséquilibres en matière de genre dans les conseils de l’État, les lois discriminatoires à l’égard des travailleur·euse·s du sexe, réclamé le droit à l’avortement en Jamaïque et s’est érigée contre les accords commerciaux, tels que le Marché unique des Caraïbes (CSME) qui permettait la libre circulation des travailleuses domestiques migrantes mais n’octroyait pas ce même droit à leurs enfants.
Elle a publié plusieurs essais universitaires, rédigé des articles d’opinion et révisé les derniers ouvrages de Walter Rodney, l’activiste politique guyanien et coleader du WPA assassiné en 1980. Survivante du cancer, Andaiye a été l’une des fondatrices de la Ligue guyanienne contre le cancer et du Groupe d’action des survivant·e·s du cancer. Elle a également siégé au conseil exécutif de l’Association caribéenne pour la recherche et l’action féministes (CAFRA), dirigé le Help and Shelter et été membre du conseil de la Commission nationale guyanienne pour les femmes. Elle a par ailleurs reçu de nombreux prix, dont le prestigieux Golden Arrow of Achievement (quatrième prix le plus important du Guyana).
Andaiye est décédée le 31 mai 2019, à l’âge de 77 ans. Les nombreux hommages que lui ont rendus des activistes, ami·e·s et celles et ceux que sa vie aura inspiré·e·s ont parlé avec éloquence de son incroyable héritage et de la grandeur de son humanité.
En voici quelques-uns :
“« Andaiye m’a profondément marquée... elle représenttait tellement de choses pour moi : une éducatrice, une combattante, elle m’a appris l’autocritique, à réfléchir plus clairement, elle m’a enseigné la survie, ce qu’est le courage sans limite, la compassion, à dépasser les apparences et traiter les gens comme des gens, sans se laisser impressionner par le statut, la classe, la race... rien de tout ça. » Peggy Antrobus, activiste féministe, auteure, universitaire, La Barbade
« Le genre d’idéalisme confiant que démontrait Andaiye, cette disposition à affronter le monde et une croyance tenace qu’on pouvait vraiment le changer... Cette politique de l’espoir... Comment honorer sa vie, son héritage et sa mémoire autrement qu’en poursuivant le travail éthiquement et en continuant à s’autocritiquer? Et de faire en sorte de placer le travail de soins des femmes au centre. » - Tonya Haynes, La Barbade
« Je peux l’entendre se moquer de notre engouement collectif. Donc, je ris tout en pleurant. Chapeau bas, chère Andaiye, et merci pour tout. Que le voyage de ton esprit soit aimant et lumineux. Passe le bonjour à Walter et aux ancêtres. » - Carol Narcisse, La Jamaïque
While active participants on the front lines of protests and uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), women became invisible, absent from processes of formation of the new states, and excluded from decision-making roles, responsibilities, and positions in the aftermath of the uprisings. Except in rare cases, men dominated leadership positions in transitional structures, including the constitutional reform and electoral committees[i]. Subsequent elections brought very few women to parliamentary and ministerial positions.
Additionally, a strong and immediate backlash against women and women’s rights has clearly emerged in the aftermath. The rise of new religious fundamentalist groups with renewed patriarchal agendas aiming to obliterate previous gains of the women’s movements even in countries with longer histories of women’s rights, such as Tunisia, has been very alarming.
The varying contexts of governance and transition processes across the MENA countries presents an important opportunity for women human rights defenders to shape the future of these democracies. However, the lack of prioritization of women’s rights issues in the emerging transitions and the aforementioned backlash have posed a variety of complex challenges for the women’s movements. Faced with these enormous challenges and possibilities, women’s rights activists have been struggling to forge ahead a democratic future inclusive and only possible with women’s rights and equality. The particular historical and contextual legacies that impact women’s movements in each country continue to bear on the current capacities, strategies, and overall preparedness of the women’s movements to take on such a challenge. Burdened with daily human rights violations in one context, with lack of resources and tools in another, with organizational tensions in a third, in addition to the constant attacks on them as activists, women human rights defenders have voiced their desire to be more equipped with knowledge and tools to be effective and proactive in engaging with these fast-changing environments. Conceptual clarity and greater understanding of notions and practices of democratization, transitional justice tools and mechanisms, political governance and participation processes, international and local mechanisms, movement building strategies, constitutional reform possibilities, and secularization of public space and government are important steps to defining future strategic action.
It is clear that feminists and women’s rights activists cannot wait for women’s rights to be addressed after transitions – issues must be addressed as the new power configurations are forming. Experiences of earlier moments of transition, namely from colonial rule, have clearly demonstrated that women’s rights have to be inherently part of the transition movement towards a more just and equal society.
What is included?
This publication represents a research mapping of key resources, publications and materials on transitions to democracy and women’s rights in different countries of the world that have undergone such processes, such as: Indonesia, Chile, South Africa, Nepal, Mexico, Argentina, Poland, Ukraine, as well as within the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). It provides bibliographic information and short summaries of resources which succinctly identify the contextual changes and challenges facing women in those particular transitional moments, as well as clearly delineates the ways in which women’s rights activists sought to confront those challenges and what lessons were learned.
A key criterion in the selection process was the primacy of a women’s rights/feminist perspective; the few exceptions to this rule offer a unique and, we hope, useful, perspective on the issues that women’s rights organizations and activists face in the region. The texts have been selected to provide a wide range of information, relevant to women human rights defenders working from the grassroots to the international level, across issues (including different case studies and examples), from different perspectives (international human rights bodies, academic institutions, NGO contributions, activists’ experiences, etc.), and at a wide range of levels of complexity, in order to respond to the needs of as many readers as possible.
The mapping clusters resources under six major categories:
Transitions to Democracy
Political Participation
Movement Building
Transitional Justice
Constitutional/Legal Reform
Responses to Fundamentalisms
[i]This and other context points are drawn from the report from Pre AWID Forum meeting on Women’s Rights in Transitions to Democracy: Achieving Rights, Resisting Backlash, collaboratively organized by AWID, the Equality Without Reservation Coalition, Global Fund for Women and Women’s Learning Partnership
Yelena Grigoriyeva, often called Lena by friends, was a prominent LGBT rights campaigner in Russia.
She was part of democratic, anti-war and LGBT movements. In her activism, Yelena was a fierce critic of President Vladimir Putin and his administration, expressing her opposition against Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea peninsula and the ill-treatment of prisoners.
Yelena came out as bisexual earlier in 2019.
"Her coming out was a surprise to me, and I didn't approve of it. I told her 'Listen, Lena, you already have a target painted on you because of your political activity. You've just pinned another to your chest." - Olga Smirnova
Yelena did receive multiple death threats and according to some of her acquaintances, was listed on a homophobic website that called on its visitors to hunt down LGBT persons. She reported the threats to the police, however the Russian state failed to provide protection.
But even in a society where political opposition, as well as members of the LGBT community and advocates for their rights, face continuous and increasing violence, Yelena kept campaigning for social justice and equality.
“She did not miss a single action. And they detained her so often that I already lost count,”
- Olga Smirnova (fellow opposition activist and friend).
Yelena was murdered on 21 July 2019, not far from home. A suspect was arrested but according to some sources, many friends and fellow activists believe that the suspect is a scapegoat and that this was a targeted political killing.
For Yelena’s relatives and friends, her case remains unsolved even though the suspect confessed.
In 2013, Russia passed legislation banning the spreading of what it described as ‘gay propaganda’. In 2014, Human Rights Watch published a report relating to this.
Body
Twitter Test
@shalinikonanur sharing a comment by her colleague debbie @salco "we can talk about shattering the glass ceiling, but we have to talk about who are sweeping those broken glasses?" challenging the #G7 to truly see who's vulnerable domestically & globally #W7Canada@kramdas@AWIDpic.twitter.com/1rs0SpLYHp
Share your stories and hear from others. By connecting our experiences, narratives and proposals we help co-create and amplify Feminist Realities.
Posso realizar o inquérito fora do KOBO e partilhar as minhas respostas convosco por e-mail?
Somente no caso de problemas de acessibilidade e/ou se realizar o inquérito noutro idioma; caso contrário, encorajamo-lo a utilizar o KOBO para a recolha e análise padronizadas de dados do WITM.
