View previous stories
	From Syria to Burma: 2012 in Citizen Human Rights Video by Madeleine Bair WITNESS   Only six words accompany the video. But they are just enough background needed for the one minute and seven seconds it depicts: “ROHINGYA MUSLIM VILLAGE IN ANDI VILLAGE 2.” Uploaded on July 13, the shaky images reveal a town engulfed in flames. Young men rush past the camera, while a man throws a bucket of water onto a rooftop, and in the distance smoke rises as high as the palm trees. What it lacks in narration it makes up for with images that illustrate the issue human rights observers had been highlighting for weeks: an ethnic cleansing of Burma’s Rohingya Muslims.   Every day at the Human Rights Channel, we watch videos like this one. Videos from regular citizens around the world who choose to point their cameras at what unfolds before their eyes. And presumably, they upload and share their videos because they hope others will bear witness. Others might care.   In May, WITNESS along with our partners at Storyful and YouTube, launched the Human Rights Channel as an effort to ensure that when a concerned individual takes out a camera and presses record, the act is not vain. By providing a dedicated space to curate and contextualize verified citizen video, we help those witnesses find an audience. And we give reporters, concerned citizens, and advocates a window into the experiences of human rights defenders and documenters around the world.   Since we began, we have curated nearly 2,500 videos from 87 countries. Often these videos are the only record of a singular abuse or struggle for rights. In this season of roundups and retrospection, we reflect on 2012 as seen through the raw footage of citizen cameras.   Citizen journalists have never been more important than they are today in Syria   In a country under siege by its own government, reporters have been banned, kidnapped, and killed. Our ongoing Watching Syria playlist curates footage of the war from the only people left to cover it: Syrians, many of whom never previously picked up a camera.   Their videos have documented the shelling of urban areas, the grim aftermath of air strikes, and the apparent use of chemical weaponsby government forces. While those are critical to exposing and documenting potential crimes of the Syrian regime, the images that linger in memory are not those of destruction but the ones that portray life during wartime.   There is the windowsill view of a caravan of residents leaving bombarded Damascus, or the scene of young children hanging out, unremarkable but for the rubble-strewn street on which they play. The amateur videography of Syrian residents is bringing us the most intimate scenes of life during wartime that outsiders have ever witnessed.   The idea of a “media blackout” may soon be a thing of the past   Repressive governments the world over have tried to stifle protests and hide abuses by banning reporting by independent or foreign media. This is true in the Nuba Mountains of Sudan, where Omar al-Bashir has forbidden all journalists to travel. Allegations of ethnic persecution by the Sudan Armed Forces could have too easily been refuted if not for Nuba Reports, a collective of community reporters. Their footage tells the stories of thousands of Nubans living in caves after fleeing the Sudanese army, and they are some of the most compelling videos we’ve seen this year, by citizen or professional journalists.   Citizens are breaking the silence on human rights abuses in other repressed societies.   Courageous Burmese journalists and citizens are filming discreetly and with the help of exiles to expose abuse the state media won’t cover. And in Zimbabwe, which ranks near the bottom of Reporters Without Borders’ Press Freedom Index, an NGO helped locals furtively report on the poor state of education in the country, and leaked the video for distribution.   Individuals everywhere are standing up to demand their rights   2012 was the year of austerity and of anti-austerity protests. While the financial woes of Greece and Western Europe captured the attention of U.S. news media, citizen journalists brought us video of protests on every continent. Our Education Protests playlist featured footage from Sri Lanka, Croatia, Chile, and elsewhere, revealing the commonality of citizens’ desire for accessible quality education.   We need more citizen witness video to combat human rights abuses   To be clear, citizen media is quite different than traditional journalism. The videos we curate rarely contain narration, attempts at analysis, or pretenses of objectivity. The Human Rights Channel is one of a growing number of efforts to provide the curation, authentication, and context needed to make sense of the stories they tell, and it is an ever more critical task. As we witnessed this year across the world, videos taken by citizen witnesses are playing an increasingly important role in shaping our contemporary news footage and permanent historical record.   The accessibility of cameras and ease of worldwide distribution has exposed more human rights stories than ever before to the media, courts, and international bodies.   But the raw video should not placate us into believing that every violation of rights is caught by a citizen-cum-witness. There are still countless countries, communities, and institutions where video cameras are confiscated, videographers are attacked, or the state controls distribution of citizen media.   As we look forward to 2013, we hope for a new year of even more citizen video. We will continue to amplify these windows into human rights issues, and will seek better ways to share it with audiences who can make a difference.   Though our lens gives us a sometimes bloody, and very often disturbing view of current affairs, videos on the Human Rights Channel overall depict a spirit of resilience.   Recently, a frequent citizen journalist from the Syrian city of Deir Ezzor shared some of the most compelling footage we’ve added to our Watching Syria playlist. His camera captured the sun setting over the city—a simple reminder of the peace that Syrians are all desperately hopung for, and their determination to enjoy liberty and happiness where and when they can find it, as fleeting as those moments may be. http://www.witness.org/   * Human Rights Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/humanrights?feature=watch Visit the related web page
	Right to Work Laws Violate Human Rights and Labor Law by International Commission for Labor Rights USA   December 10, 2012   The effort in Michigan to pass “right-to-work” legislation has come to the attention of the International Commission for Labor Rights (ICLR).   December 10 is Human Rights Day around the world. On December 10, 1948 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was ratified. It would be a cruel irony if the Michigan government on (or about) Human Rights day were to pass legislation which abrogates the basic human rights of Michigan workers.   The right of workers to form and join trade unions to protect their interests is a universal human right recognized in both human rights and labor law and is binding on all states. Right-to-work laws prevent unions from fulfilling their duty to protect the interests of the workers. Laws aimed at weakening trade unions so as to prevent them from protecting workers interests, in ICLR’s opinion, must be considered illegal.   Therefore, final passage of this legislation and/or Governor Snyder signing it abrogates basic human rights and labor law.   Consider the following:   The Universal Declaration of Human Rights requires all governments to work towards achieving the rights stated in the Declaration.   Article 23 of the Universal Declaration states:   (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.   (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.   (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself (and herself) and his (or her) family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.   (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his (or her) interests.   The right of everyone to form and join trade unions is for the purpose of protection their interests.   The “protection of interests” language in the declaration has substantive meaning. Trade unions must be treated under law in a manner which enables people who join together in trade unions to be actually able to protect their interests, so as to achieve such rights as favorable remuneration and conditions of work and ensure an existence worthy of human dignity.   The Universal Declaration was the basis for two Human Rights treaties which provide more specifics to rights contained in the Declaration. These treaties are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). In 1992 the United States ratified the ICCPR. The United States has signed but not ratified the ICESCR.   The ICCPR at Article 22 reiterates that everyone shall have the right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of his (or her) interests. The only restrictions on the right are those which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Under the ICCPR, any restrictions on trade unions must be necessary to a democratic society etc. Necessity is a high bar.   Trade Unions are one of the major building blocks of a democratic society. As such there can be no necessity for this legislation which is aimed at weakening the ability people to protect their interests by voting for a union.   The ICESCR has similar language. Article 8 (a) ensures “the right of everyone to form trade unions and join the trade union of his choice, subject only to the rules of the organization concerned, for the promotion and protection of his economic and social interests. The ICESCR also has that high bar for restrictions on organization of trade unions.   As human rights norms have developed, so have labor rights norms which protect the rights of unions, freedom of association and collective bargaining. In 1948 and 1949 the International Labor Organization (ILO) which was founded in 1919, issued Conventions 87 and 98 respectively. These conventions protect the right to organize and to collectively bargaining.   The ICCPR and ICESCR at Article 22 and Article 8 (3) integrate the provisions of ILO Convention 87, into these human rights treaties. This subsection states that no State which has ratified Convention 87 may pass legislative measures which would prejudice, or to apply the law in such a manner as to prejudice, the guarantees provided for in that Convention.   Although the United States has not ratified either Conventions 87 or 98, given their universality, they should be considered binding as customary international law. In fact, in 1998 the ILO issued the Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (FPRW) which gave special status to “core labor” standard which members of the ILO were bound to observe and report progress on to the ILO regardless of ratification.   Conventions 87 and 98- the rights to organize and collective bargaining-are part of the core labor standards with this special status. United States membership in the ILO requires compliance with these conventions.   Therefore, reading the ILO Convention 87 together with subsection 3 of Article 22 of the ICCPR and sub section 3 of the ICESCR, no state may be allowed to pass a law which prejudices the guarantees provided for in Convention 87. Right-to-work laws prejudice workers’ rights under Convention 87 and the above described human rights instruments.   Because they are designed to eviscerate the trade unions though which workers have a right “to protect their interests”, right-to-work laws prevent workers from exercising their fundamental human and labor rights.   Therefore, in ICLR’s opinion, these laws are illegal. ICLR calls upon the Michigan Legislature and Governor to comply with human and labor rights of the workers in this State and reject the right-to-work law.   * ICLR is a network of over 300 labor lawyers, labor experts and jurists around the world who consider the rights of workers to be a fundamental element in promoting democracy and economic fairness. Visit the related web page
	View more stories