View previous stories
	Challenging threats to civil society from powerful business entities by Mandeep Tiwana Head of Policy and Research at CIVICUS   August 13, 2015   In recent years, there has been a perceptible rise in restrictions on civic space – the fundamental freedoms of expression, association and peaceful assembly. This clampdown is worrying almost everyone in civil society, from national and international NGOs to philanthropic institutions to social movements, trade unions and public spirited journalists and activists. CIVICUS’ recently released Civil Society Watch report uncovers substantial threats to civic space and civil society in 96 countries in 2014 alone.   While the reasons for the eruption of repressive laws and attacks on dissenters vary, negative effects are being felt in both democracies and authoritarian states. It is increasingly evident that the dangers to civic freedoms come not just from state apparatuses but also from powerful non-state actors especially unscrupulous business entities connected to powerful politicians. A major driver of closing civic space is the rampant collusion and indeed capture of power and resources in most countries by a handful of interconnected political and economic elites.   Oxfam International projects that the richest 1 per cent will own more wealth than 99 per cent of the globe’s population by 2016. Thus civil society groups exposing corruption and/or environmental degradation by politically well-connected businesses are extremely vulnerable to persecution due to the tight overlap and cosy relationships between elites. In some countries, law enforcement agencies are directly involved in attacks on activists while in others they fail to properly investigate and bring to justice perpetrators of crimes against civil society activists including private armies, right wing militias or hired criminal elements.   With market fundamentalism and the neo-liberal economic discourse firmly entrenched in democracies, labour, land and environmental rights activists are facing heightened challenges. At least 29 environmental activists were reported murdered in Brazil in 2014. Canada’s centre right government has been closely monitoring and intimidating indigenous peoples’ rights activists opposing large commercial projects in ecologically fragile areas. India’s prime minister recently urged judges to be wary of “five star activists” even as the efforts of Greenpeace India to protect forests from the activities of extractive industries have led it to be subjected to various forms of bureaucratic harassment including arbitrary freezing of its bank accounts. In South Africa, justice continues to elude miners massacred in Marikana in 2012 following an agitation for a wage increase at a platinum mine. Spain has recently passed a restrictive law to gag anti-austerity protestors.   In countries where democratic institutions are weak such as Bolivia, Cambodia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Honduras, Laos, Kenya, Peru and the Philippines, the situation is even more challenging. Civil society groups opposing mass displacement and environmental degradation caused by the activities of large extractive industries, agricultural and housing development projects have been repeatedly targeted by unscrupulous businesses while law enforcement agencies regularly fail to protect them.   In this situation we need to defend and argue for civil society to play all of its legitimate roles, including that of acting as a watchdog on power, improving transparency and protecting the rights of the marginalised, and demonstrate the added value that comes when civil society is enabled to do so. But while exposing abuses, civil society must be careful not to propagate a narrative of disempowerment, in which governments and global corporations are presented as all powerful and civil society can only ever be vulnerable to their whims. It is important in civil society to recognise and celebrate our own power, as CIVICUS’ annual Global Day of Citizen Action.   Thus, international solidarity is critical for civil society when it is under attack, but needs to be exercised in ways that do not play to divides between global south and global north. Wherever possible, we should enable affected parties to speak for themselves in global forums. We also need enhanced focus on the development of more progressive norms on issues such as business and human rights while undertaking research that sheds more light on corrupt connections at all levels between politicians, public officials, security forces, organised crime and businesses.   http://www.civicus.org/images/CIVICUSCivilSocietyWatchReport2015.pdf http://www.hrw.org/news/2015/08/15/burma-land-rights-activists-are-newest-political-prisoners http://business-humanrights.org/en/myanmar-crackdown-against-land-rights-activists-deepens-ngos-say#c127408 http://business-humanrights.org/en/human-rights-defenders/latest-news-on-hrds http://www.hrw.org/video-photos/video/2015/07/06/world-bank-group-project-critics-threatened-harassed-jailed
	Nepal’s Culture of Impunity is derailing its Human Rights Investigations by Som Niroula & Neetu Pokharel Alliance for Social Dialogue, agencies   In Nepal, the state’s unwillingness to guarantee justice and accountability has posed a serious obstacle to post conflict rule of law and respect for human rights. During the country’s internal armed conflict between 1996 and 2006, 13,000 people lost their lives, 1,300 disappeared, and thousands more were tortured or displaced. Although the peace process has been formally concluded and a new constitution was adopted in August, transitional justice and its mechanisms remain unaddressed.   After years of advocacy on the part of conflict victims and civil society, the government has formed two commissions to dig into the atrocities committed: the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons. The purpose of the commissions is to investigate the grave violations of human rights committed during the conflict between the State Party and the then-Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist).   The commissions’ mandate is to provide reparation to the victims, recommend legal action, and guarantee that such internal conflicts do not reoccur in future. But in the absence of enforcement mechanisms, both of the commissions are essentially toothless.   The entire reconciliation effort has been plagued with problems. Leaders of both commissions were selected in a politically motivated process that lacked transparency. Moreover, the TRC calls for the victims to engage in mediation with the perpetrators, foreclosing the possibility of investigation and prosecution. And victims of rape and torture are denied justice under the TRC, which imposes a discriminatory 35-day statute of limitations to register cases.   In February 2015, 235 victims filed a petition demanding these provisions be amended. The Supreme Court ruled in the victims’ favor, clearly enunciating their right to truth, justice, and reparation. The court also ordered the government to amend the laws that allow amnesty and encourage impunity for the perpetrators.   Despite this ruling and immense pressure from civil society, however, the government and commissions have not yet developed and enforced the required laws and policies.   A culture of impunity is deeply rooted in the politics of Nepal. Thirty-eight commissions have convened to investigate human rights violations that occurred between 1990 to 2010. But the recommendations of most of them have yet to be implemented. Even more cases of human rights violations during the armed conflict have been recorded by organizations working in Nepal, but remain un-investigated by the government.   The National Human Rights Commission has investigated some of these cases, but despite this, the perpetrators have yet to be brought to justice. Some of the cases have already been filed in court by the victims and are not moving forward. Likewise, some of the decisions of the court still haven’t been implemented. The participants in the conflict are circling the wagons, creating a major challenge for those who want to hold the government accountable and honor the verdicts of the courts.   The case of Nanda Prasad Adhikari illustrates the level of institutionalized impunity. Adhikari died on September 22, 2014, while fasting with his wife for 300 days in a demand for justice for the murder of his younger son, Krishna. Adhikari’s body, which his family refuses to receive until his killer is brought to trial, remains in the mortuary of Tribhuwan University Teaching Hospital. Since Nanda Prasad’s death, his wife, Gangamaya, continues her hunger strike. Though her health is deteriorating, the government refuses to address their calls for justice.   Since last year’s earthquake, attention in Nepal has been focused on disaster relief. But to change the culture of impunity in Nepal, it is essential to focus on issues of transitional justice. We must safeguard evidence and witnesses to bring the perpetrators to justice under the law. Until this is done, Nepal cannot heal the scars of its violent history.   http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/nepal-s-culture-impunity-derailing-its-human-rights-investigations
	View more stories