View previous stories
	Human rights are about social justice by Margot Salomon, Alicia Ely Yamin and Ignacio Saiz Global Rights & agencies   Human rights are about social justice, by Margot Salomon.   As is today common knowledge, the egregious lack of regulatory oversight among US authorities saw the American financial establishment trigger an economic and human crisis that resonated around the globe and in the words of commentator Thomas Frank, ‘cheat the world to the very edge of the abyss’.   Job losses worldwide are predicted to reach 50 million, figures on developing economies indicate 64 million people will be pushed below the meagre poverty line of $1.25 a day, 100 million more people will be without access to safe drinking water, an additional 1.2 million deaths of children under the age of 5 are anticipated between 2009-2015, there are cuts in foreign development aid, sharp drops in remittances, and cuts in social programmes including for HIV/AIDS.   In Europe, bailouts and austerity measures as a response to stabilizing economies have brought their own long list of social woes on the back of budget cuts, with women, children and migrants disproportionately affected. Social unrest has been part of the popular response to the weakening of social institutions with violent police action not unusual.   What would social justice require of an NGO? It seems to me it would require – ‘documenting thoroughly and with great care abuses of human rights by governments … pointing out the responsibilities of various international actors; comparing the practices that are documented to international standards; and generating pressure on those directly and indirectly culpable to end or alleviate abuses.’   True, where social justice is at issue organizational attention might be directed to the private sector, to business, and to a different set of government laws and policies than might usually be the purview of traditional human rights organizations, but the methodology remains the same, as does the primary aim: ‘to place limits on the exercise of power’.   And it is true that social justice is about the distribution or redistribution of wealth and resources, but it is also about the distribution and redistribution of power, and in this social justice is no different than civil and political rights, those so-called ‘core’ human rights issues.   The idea that civil and political rights are the true (‘core’) human rights is an idea that has been superseded by developments in theory, law and practice. Human rights – civil and political and economic and social – work synergistically.   The political failures epitomized by the lack of financial oversight that led to the GFC crisis gave rise to social and economic harms of the gravest of sort. Solutions will also invite a holistic approach, from ensuring ‘the minimum core content’ of all rights in the United Nations International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights required recently of Spain, to the right of citizens to information so as to monitor and shape policy now and in the future.   That a human rights organization has to make choices as to where to focus its energies and its financial and human rights resources is a given, and a number of factors will naturally influence that decision. But to suggest that social justice is in some defining way different in significance or value from civil and political rights, or indeed that social justice cannot be understood as part of the canon of contemporary human rights, cannot be one of them.   * Margot Salomon heads the Laboratory for Advanced Research on the Global Economy at the LSE’s Centre for the Study of Human Rights. She was a Member of the Committee that drafted the Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and guest editor of the Special Issue of the journal Global Policy on "International Law, Human Rights and the Global Economy". http://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/journal-issue/vol-3-issue-4-november-2012   Human rights and social justice, by Alicia Ely Yamin and Ignacio Saiz.   As the international community marks the 20th anniversary of the Vienna Declaration, which unequivocally affirmed the indivisibility and equal importance of all human rights, there can be little credible basis for asserting that civil and political freedoms are the deserving “core” of the human rights agenda. Since Vienna, outdated arguments regarding the non-justiciability of economic and social rights, their vague or exclusively programmatic nature, and the impossibility of measuring progress have all been significantly eroded through practice.   The Center for Economic and Social Rights is part of a generation of international human rights organizations born after the end of the Cold War to challenge injustice in the economic and social sphere from a holistic human rights perspective.   Its mission was shaped by the realities of globalization and the chronic persistence of poverty and widening social inequality despite the democratic transitions of the 80s and 90s. In this context, the human rights movement could not just concern itself with constraining abusive interference by the state in individual civil liberties. Protecting human rights involved bolstering the state’s capacity to rein in the unbridled power of market forces, and ensuring its institutions were equipped to protect the enjoyment of human rights from infringements by private actors, such as Chevron/Texaco in Ecuador or Shell Oil in Nigeria, as well as to fulfil a series of positive obligations necessary for people to live lives of dignity.   From its inception in 1993, CESR has articulated its mission as promoting “social justice through human rights”, reflecting the goal of transforming the social and international order in which all human rights can be fully realized (in the language of Article 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights).   As human rights advocates focusing on economic and social rights, we have had to address the unfair distribution of resources which fuels deprivation and inequality within and between societies, and is doing so all the more blatantly in the wake of the global economic crisis. It is clear to us, as well as to an ever-growing number of people in the human rights field, that human rights advocacy must be concerned with distributive justice, as well as palliative retributive justice, which does not transform underlying structures of power in society.   Today, there are powerful reminders all around us that human rights and social justice aspirations are inseparable. From the ongoing turmoil in Egypt, to the protests over public services in Brazil or austerity in Europe, the same frustration is being voiced that democratic freedoms do not in themselves lead to more just societies unless accompanied by fairer social and economic governance.   This does not mean, of course, that all human rights organizations should address the full panoply of human rights. It is perfectly valid for organizations to focus on aspects of the agenda suited to their competencies and traditional modus operandi.   But methodology can also adapt to mission, rather than vice versa. The experience of organizations such as CESR shows that is possible to develop effective and rigorous methods to document abuses of economic and social rights, attribute responsibilities for specific breaches of human rights standards and press for accountability, much as organizations like Human Rights Watch do in the civil and political rights sphere.   Exposing the injustice behind more systemic policy failures – for example, building the evidence that high rates of preventable maternal death in Angola or Guatemala are linked to inequitable allocation of resources, or that post-crisis austerity measures in Ireland and Spain are discriminatory and retrogressive – has required developing new methods for rights-based monitoring and advocacy. These include quantitative tools (marshalling statistical evidence using indicators, benchmarks and indices) and techniques such as budget and tax analysis to assess whether resources are allocated and generated in line with human rights principles.   These approaches, which demand a more interdisciplinary range of skills, have been married with traditional techniques of human rights advocacy, as well as with various forms of social mobilization, to powerful effect.   There is considerable evidence that human rights research, policy advocacy and litigation, particularly when associated with social movement mobilization, have been successful in many different contexts in challenging economic and social injustices, from the denial of access to life-saving medical treatment to starvation deaths resulting from dysfunctional food schemes.   Experience has shown that for human rights advocacy to bring about change in the sphere of economic and social policy, accountability must be pursued in a variety of different forms and venues, from courtrooms to boardrooms, newsrooms, classrooms, living rooms and on the streets.   The most durable and transformative change comes about when judicial challenges and policy advocacy aimed at decision-making elites has been part of a broader strategy enabling social justice movements to deploy the tools of human rights advocacy in ways adapted to their particular context.   For this reason, economic and social rights organizations have made it a priority to forge links with social movements and grassroots groups, working with them to devise tools and strategies for accountability and to support their efforts to localize and “vernacularize” human rights claims.   Human rights organizations are far from homogenous. They vary greatly in mission, methods, approaches to partnership and levels of resources. While each organization is at liberty to define its mandate based on where it perceives it can make a difference, those with the greatest reach and profile must guard against undermining the efforts of others to promote a more comprehensive and transformative understanding of what human rights mean.   * Alicia Ely Yamin is Director of the Program on the Health Rights of Women and Children at the François-Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights, Harvard University. She is Chair of the Center for Economic and Social Rights. Ignacio Saiz is Executive Director of the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR). http://www.cesr.org/   Economic, Social and Cultural Rights - UN Office for Human Rights   http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/ESCR/Pages/ESCRIndex.aspx http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CESCR/Pages/CESCRIndex.aspx http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/MDG/Pages/MDGPost2015Agenda.aspx http://www.srfood.org/en/equality-or-bust-for-post-2015-global-development-goals-un-rights-experts Visit the related web page
	Immediate Action, long-term collective leadership needed to solve the Climate Crisis by Kofi Annan Former U.N. Secretary-General Ghana   Climate change is not just an environmental issue. It is an all encompassing threat to health and security, stability and prosperity, and our global food supply system. No nation, rich or poor, will escape its impact. And, as is increasingly clear, this impact is already being felt.   Just as the experts predicted, climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of droughts, floods and other extreme weather events. We will have to get used to the horrific scenes of devastation that Hurricane Sandy brought to the United States and Caribbean nations. Rising temperatures and changes to rainfall patterns are reducing harvests and increasing food and nutrition insecurity. As always, this is felt most by the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people.   Climate change endangers coastal areas, where nearly half the world’s population live, as well as many island countries. Sea ice covering the Arctic Ocean fell this year to the lowest level since satellite recording began. The thawing of carbon-rich permafrost soils, which will dramatically increase greenhouse gas emissions, is also deeply worrying. Climate change will speed up the destruction of vital ecosystems and accelerate the contamination of freshwater supplies through saltwater intrusion.   Climate change will also have enormous implications for global peace and development. Deteriorating environmental conditions will increase displacement and heighten competition for resources, raise tensions and trigger instability. We also know that climate change is having major economic impacts. According to a recent study, climate change is already costing the world more than $1.2 trillion a year - 1.6% of the global GDP. But these threats and costs, disturbing as they are, may just be a fraction of the potential dangers we will face in the future.   For there is alarming evidence that we are close to reaching a tipping point beyond which the effects of climate change will be irreversible. Global greenhouse gas emissions reached a new record high in 2011. In a report released today, the World Bank highlights the possibility of a 4°C rise in global temperatures this century if we continue to fail to act on climate change. This would have potentially catastrophic effects on our planet and way of life. Experts say we need a six-fold improvement in our rate of decarbonisation if we are to have more than a 50% chance of keeping the temperature rise below 2°C.   We are close to a point of no return. So how can we avert disaster? Just as the threat is urgent and comprehensive, so must be our response. First, we need a revolution in how we generate and use energy. From the green light-bulb to smart national grids, governments must adopt the right policies to reduce energy consumption while extending electricity to the 1.3 billion people who still live without it. Efficient use of energy is where we must begin.   Much more of our energy must also come from clean and renewable sources. Renewable energies, such as solar power, wind energy and biomass, have a growing presence on the global scene. But worryingly, investment in clean energy is showing signs of slowing. Much more needs to be done if we are to stimulate further expansion of clean energy sources. This includes the phasing out of fossil fuel subsidies, which currently total more than $400 billion per year. This is far greater than the total annual support for renewable energy sources.   Making this switch requires us to radically rethink the relationship between economic growth and environmental protection. For too long, they have wrongly been seen as competing aims rather than goals which reinforce each other. Tackling the threat of climate change, as Norway is showing, offers real opportunities to increase growth and advance development. A transformation to a greener economy could generate between 15 and 60 million additional jobs globally over the next two decades.   These are long-term opportunities. But we must also focus on the people who are suffering from the effects of climate change now. They need immediate support. Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia last year endured the worst food crisis of the 21st century, partially due to the devastating effects of climate change. In many parts of the world, prolonged drought is affecting once fertile areas for grazing and cultivation, threatening smallholder farmers who rely on farming for their livelihoods.   So while seeking to cut emissions, we must adapt to the impacts of climate change at the same time. This requires us to invest in climate-smart agriculture, including the increased use of improved seeds with drought and water-logging tolerance, and the sustainable intensification of farming systems. Increasing farmers’ productivity and resilience to climate change are key aims of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) – the organization which I have the honour of chairing.   There will be a double dividend if we get this right. For agriculture, of course, not only suffers from climate change but is also responsible for almost a seventh of all global greenhouse gas emissions. We can reduce this amount by using renewable energy in farming and more clean and energy-efficient technologies. Scaling-up investment in research, development and innovation is crucial for improving the productivity, profitability and sustainability of agriculture.   So is investment in another area where Norway is a world leader – aquaculture. This has enormous potential to provide good quality protein at lower cost and with a lighter carbon footprint than agriculture. But any expansion must be delivered in a genuinely sustainable way. We must find ways to minimise the damaging impacts of aquaculture, including the depletion of scarce water resources, wild fish stocks and biodiversity.   We need to focus similar attention on our forests. They are not only central to the livelihoods of over 1 billion people, but are crucial for regulating our climate through the carbon cycle. Yet deforestation and forest degradation due to agricultural expansion and unregulated logging account for nearly 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions. This, for comparison, is more than the global emissions of the entire transport sector. Governments must give a higher priority to the conservation of forest ecosystems, and improve the sustainable management of forests. The UN-REDD programme is promising as it is creating a value for the environmental services provided by forests. Policy-makers must ensure the programme’s activities are properly planned and implemented.   Strengthening land rights and introducing standards for land acquisition will help to stop the land grabs that all too often lead to deforestation. We must send a strong signal to international land speculators and biofuel producers involved in such activities. Ladies and Gentlemen, time is fast running out on our ability to tackle the damage we are causing to our planet and to humankind. We know that those who are least responsible for climate change are paying the highest price. And that the costs of tackling the challenge will be far outweighed by the price of inaction.   Yet so far we have simply failed to find the vision, courage or leadership needed. So what must be done? We need to put aside narrow national interests and work together for a global, fair and legally-binding climate treaty that commits all countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Concrete progress has to be made at the Climate Change Conference in Doha this month. Based on equity and common but differentiated responsibilities, industrialized countries, who are largely responsible for the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, must take the lead in reducing emissions.   Fast-emerging economies also need to engage meaningfully, by reducing their own carbon emissions, but in a way which does not prevent them from improving standards of living. While a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol is a crucial step forward, there remains a frightening lack of leadership to make this happen. Fairness demands that richer countries support mitigation and adaptation measures in developing countries through financial assistance, and technology transfer. The truth, however, is that we remain a long way from mobilizing the resources that will provide developing countries with adequate and predictable levels of resourcing.   Developed countries must provide predictable and sustainable levels of resourcing after the ‘Fast Start Finance’ for the period 2010-2012. They must also deliver on the commitments made at successive climate change summits to mobilize $100 billion by 2020 for the Green Climate Fund. It is also important that governments increase transparency of climate finance by establishing rules for monitoring, reporting and verifying (MRV). If they do, emerging economies will find it easier to accept that their carbon emissions cannot continue to grow uncontrolled.   We urgently need governments, corporations, universities and research centres to increase investment in research and development into environmentally sound technology and infrastructure. The private sector has a vital role to play in developing innovative solutions to climate change adaptation and mitigation. We need all companies to embrace environmental sustainability, as those represented at this conference have already done, as a core business strategy. The academic and research world must step up their efforts to identify and develop effective and affordable solutions to combat the climate threat. Scientists have to continue to improve the information and evidence they provide for decision-making.   Civil society organizations must also bring their expertise to bear and galvanise support. By working closely with local communities, they are ideally placed to ensure environmental policies meet local priorities. Through support for eco-labels, they can make it easier for consumers to reduce their consumption and to minimise their impact on the environment.   I believe each of us can make a difference. It is in individual action that I find the greatest cause for optimism – particularly in the determination of the younger generation to tackle climate change. It is this generation, the leaders of the 21st century, who understand the enormity of the threat to their futures. They have the vision to look beyond narrow national and sectional interests, which my generation has failed to find. Through grass-roots organizations young people are launching worldwide campaigns for climate justice and putting pressure on businesses and governments to meet their responsibilities.   Throughout my life I have been driven by a belief in our shared values and the need for collective action to put them into practice. There is no clearer example of why this is needed than the threat to our planet and survival due to climate change. None of us can afford to walk away or leave it to others. We need determined leadership across the board.   I urge all of you to take forward the findings of this conference within the organisations and communities you lead. It is all our responsibility to ensure our children and grandchildren inherit a sustainable world – a world that allows mankind to live in peace and harmony with nature. We have to find the strength and determination to solve the climate crisis and to change the world for the better.   * Kofi Annan Foundation, the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), Africa Progress Panel, The Elders. Visit the related web page
	View more stories