HUMAN RIGHTS ADVOCATES
Vol. 41
Summer 2003
new draft norms for transnational corporations and
ongoing challenges to implementation. The interns
closed the meeting with a special presentation to
Connie de la Vega to thank her for her support,
guidance and wisdom throughout the year.
Human Rights Advocates
Annual Meeting
Human Rights Advocates held its Annual
Meeting on April 30 at Boalt Hall. The meeting
began with a welcome reception for members and
guests. Chair Julianne Traylor opened the official
meeting, reporting on a number of important human
rights issues during a difficult year. Approximately
30 HRA members and guests introduced themselves.
Board Member Connie de la Vega distributed the
Annual Financial Report and noted the significant
amount of work accomplished this year within
HRA’s very small budget.
HRA PARTICIPATION AT UNITED
NATIONS MEETINGS
By Connie de la Vega
Human Rights Advocates members
participated at the U.N. Commission on the Status
of Women (CSW) and the U.N. Commission on
Human Rights (CHR). In March, four students
from the University of San Francisco School of
Law (USF) participated as Frank Newman Interns
at the CSW in New York: Catrinel Butnaru, Connie
Cabello, Jeremiah Johnson, and Hekani Jakhalu
(Ms. Cabello and Mr. Johnson were supported by
the Edith Coliver Internship Fund). They were
assisted by Board Member Nicole Phillips and
former Intern Mary Piasta, also from U.S.F. In
April, eight Frank Newman Interns participated at
the CHR in Geneva: Tina Rose Camba, Sarah
Canepa, Manish Daftari, Matthew Heaphy, Coleen
Liebmann, Conchita Lozano, and Helen Paik all
from U.S.F. A grant from the Jesuit Foundation at
U.S.F., in addition to the Frank Newman Fund,
made it possible for so many students to attend.
The students were supervised by Board Member
Connie de la Vega and were joined by Anne James,
a lawyer from Washington D.C. Another U.S.F.
student, Sayareh Dehzad, prepared written
statements on the trafficking of women and
children for both Commissions. The students’
reports on their work follow below. Documents
cited in the articles can be found at the U.N. web
site: <www.unhchrc.ch>
HRA members then voted by secret ballot to
elect HRA Board Members for the 2003-2004 year.
Advisory Board Member Rita Maran counted the
ballots. By majority vote, the following Board
Members were reelected to the Board: Connie de la
Vega, Julianne Cartwright Taylor, Cindy Cohn, Anne
Wagley, Nicole Phillips, Michelle Leighton and
Kristin Lamson.
Connie de la Vega gave an overview of the
work done by 13 Frank C. Newman and Edith
Coliver interns over the past year, including writing
reports, short statements to the various United
Nations Human Rights bodies, lobbying plans and
oral intervention statements on a number of topics at
the Commission on the Status of Women, the
Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of
Human Rights and the Commission on Human
Rights. The topics included trafficking, arbitrary
detention, toxics, right to water, juvenile death
penalty and migrant workers, among others. Eight of
the interns then presented their experiences and
accomplishments at the U.N. meetings, which are
discussed in more detail in the following articles.
Table of Contents
At the close of the meeting, Advisory Board
Member Rita Maran reported that HRA signed on to a
letter with the ACLU and a number of other human rights
organizations regarding serious concerns with the Patriot
Act II. Board Member Michelle Leighton also reported on
a new “Right to Know” initiative, which follows the
publishing of Beyond Good Deeds, regarding corporate
responsibility. Michelle also reported on the status of the
Summary of HRA Activities at the UN Commission
……1
Working Group on Transnational Corporations
...............................… 1
Transnational Corporations and Human Rights
..............................… 4
Migrant Worker Rights ……….…………. 7
1
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
resolution it requested a separate vote on the
paragraph addressing the execution of juveniles and
then was the sole no against it. This resulted in a
strong reply by not only by Uruguay, who on behalf
of GRULAC stressed that the administration of the
death penalty to minors was against the norms of
international law but also Ireland, who on behalf of
the European Union stated that the proposed
deletions by the U.S. were not acceptable. (See
U.N. Press Release, 59th Session, 25 April 2003,
afternoon.)
Review of Death Penalty Cases
In addition to the work of the interns, HRA
co-sponsored an Informative Meeting on “The Basic
Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy
and Reparation for Victims of Violations of
International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law.”
The panelists were Gabriella Echeverria,
from REDRESS, Mona Rishmawi, Senior Advisor to
the High Commissioner (OHCHR), Patricio Utrearas,
from the International Commission of Jurists, and
Jens Modvig, from International Rehabilitation
Council for Torture Victims. They reported on the
status of the draft of the Basic Principles, which had
resulted from the consultative meeting held with
independent experts Theo van Boven and Cherif
Bassiouni in the Fall of 2002. (See E/CN.4/2003/63.)
While there had been agreement on various
principles, an enforcement mechanism is still needed.
That is the goal of the resolution sponsored by Chile,
which was passed by consensus by the CHR this year.
(See E/CN.4/2003/RES/72). The U.S. stated that it
was prepared to join in consensus on the right to
restitution, but expressed concern that the
consultative process relied too heavily on academic
experts at the expense of Government experts, and
therefore it did not accept any one text as the sole
basis for discussion.
The actions and statements by the U.S.
have made it a lot less effective as an advocate for
human rights. This was reflected in the briefing
sessions
put
on
for
non-governmental
organizations, which were sparsely attended, in
sharp contrast with past years when it was difficult
to get into the room. The HRA delegation was able
to work cooperatively with the U.S. delegation with
respect to the rights of migrants as will be discussed
below. Many of the positions taken, however, were
contrary to the views of the American public,
something that will not change until more people
take an interest in the meetings at the U.N.
HRA BOARD MEMBERS
RECEIVE AWARDS
Connie de la Vega received the 2003 Matthew O.
Tobriner Public Service Award
David Weissbrodt received the Human Rights Award
from Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights
C.M. Eya Nchama was elected City Councilmember
from Grand Saconnex in Geneva
Trafficking of Women and Children
Introduction by Sayareh Dehzad
Event at USF
My experience working on the issue of
Trafficking in Women and Children has been
educational, thought-provoking, and compelling.
My area of focus on this issue was multi-faceted.
The first project was a long report on this topic,
which produced a guidepost for the issues that
would ultimately be used in the shortened written
statements submitted to the Commission on the
Status of Women (CSW) in New York
That statement by the U.S. reflected its less
than cooperative stance on many issues. However, its
positions were not supported by other countries and
its influence was less important than it has been in the
past. Indeed, it often was the sole no vote on some
important resolutions such as those on the right to
food (E/CN.4/2003/RES/25) and the right to health
(E/CN.4/2003/RES/28). On the rights of the child
2
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
(E/CN.6/2003/NGO/5) and the Commission on
Human Rights in Geneva (E/CN.4/2003/NGO/40).
helped me scratch the surface of just ONE of the
issues related to the intricate field of International
Human Rights, and has raised my consciousness
about the depth and importance of this very
compelling area of law.
The first written statement, submitted to the
Commission on the Status of Women, under the
auspices of Human Rights Advocates, dealt with two
inter-related issues: 1) the demand that creates the
market for trafficked victims and 2) in particular, the
role of UN peacekeeping troops and other military
personnel in contributing to that demand.
Commission on the Status of Women
Addressing Demand
by Connie Cabello
The second written statement, sent to the
Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, was a bit
more detailed, in that there were a number of added
issues we addressed besides demand and the role of
the military in fostering demand. This was due in
large part to the fact that last year’s session on this
topic had already recognized the introduction of
demand as a concept just as critical, if not mores, than
the issue of supply previously addressed in past years.
This past March five students attended the
47th Session of the Commission on the Status of
Women (CSW) in New York concerning the issues
of Violence Against Women and Girls. It was an
exciting time to be there as the Security Council
was simultaneously meeting in closed sessions
upstairs at the UN headquarters, assessing whether
to back the United States’ effort to wage war in
Iraq. The issues we discussed in the downstairs
meeting rooms of the Session of the CSW were
thus inherently inter-linked with the issues being
discussed by the Security Council; particularly the
effects of war on women and children.
These additional issues included:
1) The importance of educating parents of
children vulnerable to procurers because of
the impoverished conditions they live in.
2) The
importance
of
educating
UN
peacekeeping troops on the intrinsic value of
their missions and how to better serve the
communities they purport to assist.
3) The need to stop the exploitation of young
victims, particularly because of the nature of
the network as a perpetuating cycle of
violence that is hard to break away from…
4) Addressing the appalling fact that younger
and younger children are being ensnared in
these horrible networks, for the mistaken
belief that they will not be infected with HIV
or AIDS, and thus, will be “clean” for the
customers; and
5) Calling on nations to research, report on, and
take measures to reduce the demand for
commercial sex.
In order to strengthen my knowledge
regarding the trafficking industry, I researched
dozens
of
articles
written
by various
nongovernmental
organizations
(NGO’s),
newspapers, and independent journalists. I soon
became aware of the horrors of the trafficking
industry and the true extent of the problem.
Trafficking is the largest form of organized crime
around the world, after the trafficking of drugs. It
is a particularly heinous crime in that it subjects not
only women but also children to various degrading,
dangerous, and inhumane conditions.
After
familiarizing myself with the trafficking trade, I
soon became impassioned to advocate for the
victims of this industry and hopefully make strides
at the Commission on this important issue. In my
report regarding the trafficking industry I urged the
delegates to include the issue of demand in their
Final Outcome Document as well as highlighted the
various manifestations of the trafficking industry.
With the knowledge I had attained, along with the
report I had written, I went to the UN armed with
the resources to argue and hopefully make a
positive impact on the trafficking issue.
I worked with several people who traveled to
both the CSW and the Commission on Human
Rights, to represent Human Rights Advocates at both
forums, on this very important topic. Drafting a letter
to the Philippine Delegate, helping edit an oral
statement to be read at the Commission on Human
Rights, and brain-storming on who to lobby and how
were just some of the skills I practiced and honed in
this process. I am grateful for this opportunity. It has
During the two weeks at the UN, my
colleagues and I split off in different directions and
3
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
participated in a variety of caucuses in order to ensure
that our issues were addressed in as many NGO
statements as possible. In almost every caucus the
issue of trafficking came to the forefront in one form
or another. Whether it was in the context of
indentured children in India or women prostituted in
Thailand, the them was the same; trafficking, and its
various manifestations infects almost every sector of
the global population.
Together we drafted
statements urging delegates to include the trafficking
of women and children, as well as the demand aspects
of trafficking, as a crucial issue related to overall
Violence Against Women and Children.
and consider it an extremely valuable educational
and professional experience.
Addressing the Causes of Trafficking
by Jeremiah Johnson
Rising above the East River, the United
Nations overlooks Brooklyn to the world beyond.
This past March, that world was listening to every
pause made in connection with the Security
Council, hardly hearing the raised voices concerned
with the elimination of all forms of violence against
women and girls emanating from Conference Room
2. Human Rights Advocates was among the voices
participating in the Commission on the Status of
Women. I went to the Commission concerned with
trafficking of women and girls, particularly the role
of “demand” and education.
We not only allied with various NGO’s in
lobbying delegates through joint statements, but we
also lobbied country delegates in person, to ensure
that our issues were addressed in the Outcome
Document. We were able to listen to the various
country delegates and also read their submitted
documents relaying their positions on the issue of
Violence Against Women.
This gave us the
opportunity to align ourselves with the delegates in
favor of our position and suggest to those that
overlooked our issue to reconsider it.
Nitin Desai, Under-Secretary-General for
Economic and Social Affairs, opened the Session
with remarks of “synergy” between the
Commission and other UN bodies.
Country
interventions followed with delegates addressing
the demand of trafficked persons, actually saying
“demand.”
Though not a member of the
Commission, the Philippines was the first to call for
action, then continued to remind the Commission
that marching orders were needed, not talking
points. Canada chimed in: the outcome document
must be more than words, it must be sharp, focused,
action oriented. The Commission was making a
good, ambitious start; I was excited and optimistic.
Although most of the delegates were
receptive to addressing the problems of trafficking of
women and children, and most agreed that programs
addressing demand need to be implemented, not all
were receptive to the idea of specifically addressing
the role of the military and peacekeepers in
perpetuating and oftentimes, creating this problem.
Of course the one country receptive to the idea was
Iraq, which emphasized the effects that war in
general has on women and children and the various
forms of violence they endure as a result.
Throughout the Commission, women
approached me, congratulating for attending. If
attendance were all that is needed, violence toward
women would have ended a long time ago. I was
not at the Commission to speak on behalf; I was at
the Commission to speak to. I was there to talk
about educational programs that reduce the demand
that causes trafficking. My research showed
education was an answer, providing realistic
economic opportunities to women and girls,
sensitizing government authorities to trafficking
issues and eliminating men’s ignorance toward the
dangers
and
effects
surrounding
sexual
exploitation.
The Commission was unfortunately unable to
reach a consensus on a final document. Various
reasons were given. This is highly indicative of the
need for changes within the Commission on the
Status of Women. Compared to past years, the
commission has definitely improved. This year
Human Rights Advocates was able to make an oral
intervention during one of the sessions of r the first
time. This was facilitated by the recommendations of
our past delegation regarding the work of the CSW.
Regardless of the lack of consensus on a final
Outcome Document, my fellow USF students and I
view our participation in the UN’s 47th Session on the
Commission on the Status of Women as a success
It was important for the outcome document
to specifically connect education for women and
girls with the elimination of violence against
4
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
women and girls. During the Commission, I tried to
be a facilitator. I considered proposals made by
China, Syria, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, Sudan and Libya
attempting to connect them into four manageable
(and hopefully agreeable) categories relating to the
root causes of violence against women and girls.
These categories were gender inequality in education,
economic development, health and safety and
political participation. Overall, HRA’s proposed
language highlighted the comprehensive and
connected approach needed to eliminate violence
against women.
would have to carry on without its marching orders.
Though the real success of the Commission could
never have been found in a piece of paper; this
Commission discussed tough issues, exchanged
views and agreed there was a problem. Delegates
and NGO participants left the Commission better
off. True, the Commission failed in process,
however there is a difference between process and
progress. Human rights protection is not found in
words, but in custom, practice. That is the real
success of this experience.
The world will
continue, and countries have shown they are
committed to a better the world. It’s putting it in
words, that’s the hard part.
I carefully reviewed other countries
proposals, advocating minor changes. For example,
after I made some changes, the United States
proposal should have read: “recognizing that the lack
of education and economic independence increases
women’s vulnerability to trafficking, sexual
exploitation and other forms of violence, take all
necessary measures to strengthen women’s [HRA:
equal] access to education and economic
opportunities by [HRA: and] protecting [HRA: and
promote] their human rights and fundamental
freedoms.” This, and other proposals, emphasized
that protecting human rights is not enough to end the
violence, nations need to establish programs, like
education, micro lending and job training that address
the root causes of all forms of violence against
women and girls.
Causes of Trafficking
by Catrinel Butnaru
I am an LLM student at the University of
San Francisco, School of Law. As a part of the
Human Rights clinic program I participated to the
47th Session of the Commission of the Status of
Women from 3 to14 March, 2003 at United Nations
Headquarters in New York.
Women’s trafficking is a well-known
international problem and concern. The growing
number of women forced into trafficking, the evergrowing number of countries as countries of origin
or destination of trafficking, and the lack of
adequate prevention mechanisms are the overriding
reasons for this concern. For decades after the war,
Eastern European countries suffered under
Communist regimes and civil, political and cultural
rights were violated. Under this oppressive situation
women’s rights were less acknowledged and more
abused. The new geopolitical situation in Eastern
Europe brought new realities and women remained
victimized. As a Romanian, I felt personally
concerned about Romania as a country of origin
and transit of trafficking and I wanted to contribute
to the fight against the proliferation of trafficking
by writing a report on this subject.
The NGO Community took a strong stand:
male perpetrators of violence must be punished. I
worked hard to ensure that any punishment must also
consider the misinformation, stereotypes and
misconceptions that may lead to and perpetuate
violence in all its forms. Punishment should have a
rehabilitative aspect, ending the cycle of violence.
HRA promoted language introduced by New
Zealand, Australia, Thailand and Zambia calling for
nations to support measures to encourage “attitudinal
and behavioral change on the part of the perpetrator.”
As I left on a cold and clear Friday morning,
I recognized most delegates. I was familiar with the
different draft proposals, and they included “demand”
and referred to rehabilitation for perpetrators. I felt
comfortable leaving for New Jersey, leaving the vote
in the hands of the Commission. All the Commission
had to do was agree by consensus, and it wasn’t like
there wouldn’t be a vote. But like the second floor,
there would be no vote, and there would be no
conclusion, and the world beyond the East River
Trafficking is nothing but another form of
violence and discrimination against women. In my
paper I presented an overview of trafficking
activities taking place in Eastern Europe and
explained the reasons behind the proliferation of
trafficking.
By reducing and eliminating
employment discrimination and sexual harassment
5
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
we may help in the international effort and prevent
trafficking of women from happening. An
international effort is needed to combat this problem.
It was a very enriching experience to attend
the 47th session of the Committee on the Status of
Women(CSW). We were able to see how the UN
mechanism works and also be a part of that
process.
This spring, the 47th Session of the
Commission on the Status of Women was held at
United Nations Headquarters in New York, from 3
to14 March 2003. Countries’ delegations and
representatives of non-governmental organizations
participated at this meeting. I represented the Human
Rights Advocates. My mission was to lobby the
Romanian delegation by persuading them regarding
the need for implementation of the nondiscriminatory employment laws and by suggesting
full adoption of the sexual harassment law. One of the
people I spoke with was the First Secretary of the
Permanent Mission of Romania to the U.N. I also
approached some other NGOs such as the “European
Women’s Lobby”. The recommendations on my
report were implemented in the final draft submitted
to the Commission on the Status of Women.1 One of
the recommendations regarding non-discriminatory
employment law was omitted, so I contacted the
representative of the EU Labor Department who
assured me that they are going to put this
recommendation on the EU’s agenda.
I worked on ‘Domestic violence and the
role of the State’ in the context of developing
countries and Muslim countries and how domestic
violence against women is perpetuated indirectly
under the guise of religion, tradition and custom. In
addition, I looked at the issue of government
dismissal of domestic violence as a family matter or
acts committed by private actors and thus not
accountable under the international human rights
law.
As of June 2002, 170 countries have
ratified Convention on Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and 56
ratifications contain reservation clauses. One of the
most common reservations is that the treaty does
not support ‘personal law’ and religious law’.
Personal laws determine rights in matters relating to
marriage, divorce, maintenance, inheritance,
guardianship and custody. They perpetuate
women’s subordination within the family. Personal
law obstructs women’s participation in political and
public life and significantly contributes to the cause
of continuing violence against women. And this
discrimination effected by personal law is
perpetuated by the state’s accommodation of
powerful orthodoxies. In many Muslim countries,
law is equated to religion, and therefore, as
governmental authorities argue, it should remain
free from interference by international community.
But unless these laws are amended, women cannot
be empowered to combat violence and cultural
practices that frustrates and denies them equality
and dignity.
Human Rights Advocates role at the
U.N. was very important in helping focus the problem
regarding trafficking of women. We were able to
remind and pressure delegations and organizations,
who have the power to change, enforce, protect and
eliminate violence against women’s rights, to keep
this subject on their agenda.
From a personal point of view this experience
was very relevant to me, in as much as I experienced
how the mechanism works, the emphasis on
language, and the process involved in drafting the
conclusions submitted by the Commission on the
Status of Women.
Urging the governments to withdraw their
reservations which are in conflict with the
objectives of CEDAW was one of the main
recommendations of my paper.
Domestic Violence
The CSW session was for two weeks. The
first week focused on specific countries, as
delegates presented their oral statements on what
and how much their governments have achieved
over the years. Some countries used the process as
a political platform. The Pakistan delegation
focused on how the Indian government has taken
no action against the violence caused against the
by Hekani Jakhalu
See the report entitled: “Women’s human rights and
elimination of all forms of violence against women and
girls as defined in the Beijing Platform for Action and the
outcome document of the twenty-third special session of
the General Assembly-03/03”.
1
6
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
Muslim women in the 2002 Gujarat incident.
Palestine delegates objected to Israel’s silence on the
atrocities committed by them against Palestinian
women.
The second week focused on the language of
the draft report. The commission came out with a
draft of 26 points. Each point was discussed and
deliberated in detail. Different countries had different
views and opinions depending on their countries
stand on the issue. For example section 3 (h) of the
draft stated, ‘Refrain from invoking custom, tradition
or practices in the name of religion or culture to avoid
obligations to eliminate violence against women’. In
general all delegates agreed that the language of
‘refrain’ should be replaced with ‘prohibit’ to have a
stronger impact. But in this paragraph, some
countries such as Pakistan and Iran wanted to do
away with the word ‘religion’ which was strongly
supported by the United States delegates on the
ground that getting into the religion issue would be
too sensitive to some countries.
Commission on Human Rights
Trafficking of Women & Children
by Tina Rose Camba
I worked on Agenda Item 12 on Violence
Against Women, on the issue of trafficking of
women and girls, with a particular focus on the
demand for trafficking created by militaries and
United Nations (UN) Peacekeeping Troops. The
trafficking of women and girls is a leading source
of international criminal activity. An alarming
demand for such trafficked persons is found in the
communities surrounding militaries and UN
Peacekeeping Troops.
International strategies,
including fact-finding, the generation of reports and
implementation of educational programs geared
toward the victims and customers of demand, are
urgently needed to address the growing number of
trafficked persons.
As HRA members at the commission we
used our research as a tool to lobby with the
delegates. In the second week during the general
debate, we tried to identify the stand of different
county delegates on our respective issues. We
approached countries not in favor of our issues to
discuss with them why they should be more flexible
in changing their views and gave them our research
papers in support of our position. We also approached
countries who were in favor of our position.
It was a rewarding experience to watch how
people from different parts of the world with different
political, social, economic, religion and cultural
differences come together under one umbrella and try
to reach consensus. It was also interesting to observe
how some countries were very passionate and very
involved with the whole process and how some
countries would be just passive participants.
In the past two years, the clinic participants
were successful in getting the issue of demand into
the Resolution on Trafficking of Women and Girls.
It was my assignment this year to lobby and get the
issue of the demand caused by militaries and UN
Peacekeeping Troops into this year’s Resolution.
When I spoke to the Philippine Delegate in
charge of the Resolution, he informed me that the
Commission had requested member states to issue
bi-annual resolutions, and that basically there was
not going to be a resolution on trafficking this year.
He also told me that a fellow non-governmental
agency, Franciscans, International, was working
within the UN General Assembly to get “A Year of
Trafficking” in place for 2004. At that point, I
shifted my focus to speaking to those parties who
would be working on my issue at the General
Yes, United Nations is truly a body, which is
trying to make this world a better place. The question
is, how much our leaders are doing to take this home
and implementing it.
Lastly, I would like to mention that it was
due to the efforts and commitment of Prof. Connie de
la Vega that all the work of the HRA delegation to
the CSW was successful.
7
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
Assembly. I also gave my proposed language to the
Office of the High Commissioner, for use for the
resolution on trafficking of women and girls at the
General Assembly.
Going to the Commission on Human Rights in
Geneva was an experience beyond words. I thank
Human Rights Advocates and Professor Connie de
la Vega for providing such a unique opportunity. I
wish that every law student at USF could have the
experience of learning about the UN mechanisms
and actually having the opportunity to participate
with these UN bodies, and bring about meaningful
change one contact at a time.
The remainder of my work at the UN
included attending meetings held by women’s rights
organizations, and hosted by the Special Rapporteur
of Violence Against Women. In these meetings,
women came from all over the glove to share their
stories of the successes and challenges they have had
while advocating for women’s rights. I learned so
much about how the laws in different countries
underscore the false idea that women are inferior to
men. For example, one woman from Uganda Land
Laws discussed some examples of inheritance laws,
where widows had to go through a “cleansing
process” (systematic rape by a hired “cleanser”) in
order to inherit her husband’s property. A female
leader from Pakistan talked about how women in
Pakistan cannot own property. She used herself as an
example. Even though she is extremely educated and
in a place of power in Pakistan, her property is
registered under her husband’s name. I had the
pleasure of meeting Birte Scholz, a former USF
student and clinic participant, who is advocating for
the right to housing for women. I was so impressed
by the grass roots efforts and the passion of these
women to advocate for women’s rights in
circumstances much worse than what we face here in
America. It made me believe that change happens,
albeit slowly, in the international human rights arena.
Arbitrary Detention
by Manish Daftari and Matthew Heaphy
This semester, we continued the Clinic’s
work on the question of arbitrary detention under
Agenda Item 11 at the UN Commission on Human
Rights. Before traveling to Geneva in April as
Frank C. Newman Interns representing Human
Rights Advocates, we collected information on the
recent special registration requirement mandated by
the USA Patriot Act and other instances of arbitrary
detention in the United States following September
11. We noted with special attention the problem of
denial of the right to counsel in the context of
arbitrary detention as well as the systematic erosion
of civil and political rights for Middle Eastern and
Muslim individuals.
Using the United States as an example, we
examined the legality of legislation and government
practices under various international legal
instruments, including the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
and the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. We
investigated cases following September 11 in which
Middle Easterners and Muslims were singled out,
though
never
charged,
and
detained
incommunicado without access to counsel. We also
found cases where individuals of Muslim and
Middle Eastern descent were detained when they
reported to register under the special registration
requirement mandated by the USA Patriot Act and
discriminatorily carried by the Department of
Justice. We also investigated the question of
inhuman and degrading treatment in this context,
highlighting reports of unnecessary body cavity
searches, hosing down of detainees and cramming
detainees into overcrowded cells.
Lastly, this progress is exemplified through
the service of the Special Rapporteur on the Violence
Against Women. She took her assignment nine years
ago, at a time when “women’s rights” were not seen
as rights unto themselves. She provided an overview
of the change that has come about in her nine years of
service, and that through her reports and the joint
efforts of women’s groups in various countries,
women’s rights are now recognized. This progress is
also revealed in words from the High Commissioner
on Human Rights, one of the two male panelists and
attendees at the meeting on Violence Against
Women. He spoke about the need for men, not just
women to recognize that women’s rights are not just
women’s issues. He emphasized that women’s rights
can be more fully achieved when men start taking
responsibility and look at how their actions deny
women’s rights.
The primary focus of the report we
submitted to the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention was the practice of moving detainees
8
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
frequently in the weeks immediately following
detention and its relationship to the denial of the right
to counsel. In both the special registration detentions
and post-September 11 detentions, individuals were
moved frequently in the weeks immediately
following detention – usually in the first few days – a
practice which effectively denies access to counsel by
disorienting detainees and making it difficult for
family and hired counsel to locate detainees. We hope
that our report will help to highlight this practice and
provide a basis for an investigation by the working
group.
education, persistence and timing in trying to
influence resolutions and calling attention to human
rights violations that warrant investigation. Most
importantly, it showed us the continuing
importance of the global dialogue on human rights
that is fostered by the Commission.
Report available at:
http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/(Sy
mbol)/E.CN.4.2003.NGO.55.En?Opendocument
Arbitrary Detention Resolution available at:
http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/(Sy
mbol)/E.CN.4.2003.L.40.En?Opendocument
Press release on adoption of Arbitrary Detention
Resolution available at:
http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view0
1/B3C62AE002AEDED4C1256D1100520211?ope
ndocument
In our lobbying efforts, we discovered that
countries such as the United States, contrary to efforts
to delegitimize the United Nations and international
law, were actually quite concerned with small
changes to resolutions that might impact their
obligations under international law. In one drafting
session, the United States delegate stressed to the
French delegate that some rights civil and political
rights were derogable in states of emergency. We
decided to incorporate this notion in our oral
statement, highlighting the fact that discrimination
based on religion or national origin is not derogable.
In addition, we emphasized that the rights to counsel
and to be free of arbitrary detention can only be
derogated from if a state of emergency is declared.
The derogation is reported to the other parties to the
Convention, and the reasons for the derogation are
stated. We also approached the United States
delegation on this subject. They claimed that there
has been no derogation from these rights and said that
they were not aware of the denial of rights we
reported.
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Illicit
Transfer of Toxics: Privatization of Water
by Coleen Liebmann
My two projects focused on economic,
social and cultural rights, which tend to be the least
considered rights in the United States. The first
project looked at the adverse effects of the illicit
transport and dumping of toxic substances. The
second project was utilities, particularly water
distribution.
I focused on the need for states to take
proactive measures to regulate the activities of
multinationals operating within their borders. This
is particularly essential in the developing world,
where these activities can effectively prevent
people from realizing the full enjoyment of
economic, social and cultural rights such as the
right to life, health and a healthy environment.
While the precise language we sought in the
arbitrary detention resolution was not included by the
French delegate, we worked actively with the French
delegation to be sure to address the right to counsel
without threatening the mandate of the Working
Group on arbitrary detention. The resolution was
adopted by consensus without a vote on April 23,
2003. The language we helped to draft was added as
Operative Paragraph 3(d), reading “The Commission
on Human Rights … [e]ncourages the Governments
concerned … [t]o pay special attention, during states
of emergency, to the exercise of those rights that
ensure protection against arbitrary detention.”
This experience gave us valuable insight into
how the United Nations works as well as the reality
of representing a non-governmental organization at
the world body. In many cases, it is a question of self-
The illicit transport of toxic wastes includes
the movement of wastes from one territory to
another, where, often the latter territory may not
have the technological capabilities to process
wastes and make them less harmful to the health of
its citizens. Of particular concern is the movement
of toxic wastes that are banned in the country of
expert, an issue that we were able to lobby on very
successfully last year. We also focused on the
concern that many states are often either unable or
unwilling to enforce their own environmental laws
to protect the health of their citizens and effective
9
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
international instruments don’t exist to force
multinationals to adhere to international human rights
standards.
shut down by the Mexican government in 1994, its
owner, a U.S. citizen, crossed the border back into
the United States, despite outstanding arrest
warrants, charging him with gross environmental
pollution. According to the Mexican government,
he left behind more than 6000 metric tons of toxins.
In China, in the area known as Guiyu,
approximately 100,000 migrant workers were
employed breaking apart and processing obsolete
computers from North America, due to restrictions on
dumping in the United States. 21st century wastes are
being recycled using 19th century technologies.
Workers sort plastic by heating it with a cigarette
lighter. Many complained of headaches. Women and
girls were seen soaking circuit boards in molten lead
solder heated in woks in order to remove computer
chips for resale. After the chips are separated the
lead is simply poured onto the ground. This industry
has severely polluted the land, air and water.
Children in the local workers community
have experienced sever nose bleeds and lost their
hair in clumps. There has also been a surge in the
number of infants born with anencephaly, a fatal
defect in which babies are born with littler or no
brain or skull.
Neither the government of Mexico nor the
company has yet provided any clean-up, and trade
agreements between the US and Mexico do not
provide an effective mechanism for the victims to
see a remedy from either. Further, the government
of Mexico failed to extradite Mr. Kahn, despite the
criminal charges. The statute of limitations on
these charges ran in 1999.
Improper disposal of e-waste that contains
heavy metals and pollutants poses a significant threat
to human health, leading to respiratory illness, skin
infections, stomach disease and other conditions.
Computer or television monitors containing cathode
ray tubes, typically contain enough lead to be
classified as hazardous waste when being recycled or
disposed of. A typical crt computer monitor may
contain up to eight pounds of lead. Lead is among
the most potent neurological toxins known. Guiyu
residents reported that children there suffered medical
problems including breathing ailments, and a surge in
leukemia cases.
A cleanup of the site could cost $6 million
or more. In late 2002, the state of Baja California
and Kahn filed a joint loan request for $800,000
from the North American Development Bank,
which was created as part of NAFTA. A bank
official said the request is being reviewed. One
concern is that the loan might not be sufficient to
cover the cost of cleanup.
Despite legislation passed by the Chinese
government and some recent crackdowns, electronic
waste continues to be processed in China under
similar conditions to those described here. I had the
opportunity to talk to the Chinese delegate working
on these issues. She agreed to discuss the possibility
of inviting the Special Rapporteur on Toxics to come
to China to investigate the current conditions under
which electronic wastes are being recycled.
Multinationals are also making their
presence felt around the world through privatization
of basic infrastructure services, such as water,
sanitation, and electricity. These services play a
critical role in the development of sales and local
communities, with important direct and indirect
links to living standards and economic growth.
The role of government in the provision of
basic infrastructure goods and services has changed
dramatically in both developed and developing
countries over the past two decades. In many
countries, engaging in private sector in
infrastructure financing and operations has resulted
in a number of major benefits. These benefits
include access to private finance for expanding
services, greater incentives for efficiency, and
fewer burdens on limited public resources.
This second case example demonstrates the
problems associated with the movement of industries
to nations where those responsible for the production
of toxic waste may be able to escape responsibility
for cleanup.
For more than a decade, an American-owned
company, Metales y Derivados was twice fined by
Mexico’s Procuraduria Federal de Proteccion al
Ambiente (PROFEPA) for violating Mexican
environmental laws by failing to repatriate or
nationalize the waste produced. After the plant was
Trade agreements have increasingly
reflected this move toward allowing the private
10
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
sector to provide basic public services. Such leading
international financial institutions as the World Bank
and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have
aggressively promoted this movement by pushing
countries to privatize public services as basic as water
supply as conditions for development assistance loans
and debt restructuring.
some 10,000 township homes, sparking riots and
‘birthing radical groups of clandestine plumbers.’
In some South African municipalities prepaid water meters are installed that cut-off access to
water if citizens ball behind in their payments.
Where clean water is not available, villagers are
forced to get their water from polluted rivers
causing increased cases of cholera, dysentery and
other water borne illnesses.
The results of these programs have not
always led to improvements in the delivery of basics
services to the various sectors of developing societies.
In fact, the privatization of public infrastructure
services has often led to actual reductions in their
overall quality, and many members of society have
been cut off entirely from such services. It is ironic
that the countries which most require assistance from
private companies to provide basic infrastructure
services are those least able to provide safeguards to
protect their citizens and monitor the activities of
these multinationals.
Cochabamba, in Bolivia put its water
system up for auction in 1999. The only company
to bid was Aguas del Tunari, a division of the U.S.
firm Bechtel, which promised to expand water
service.
In exchange, the sale agreement
guaranteed the company a 15 to 17 percent profit.
After privatization, water rates in
Cochabamba increased.
Some people were
reportedly paying as much as 10-30 percent of their
income for water. Many Bolivians took to the
streets in protest. Over the next three months, the
Bolivian army fought protesters in the streets,
arrested hundreds, and eventually killed a 17 yearold boy. In the end, the company withdrew and the
uprising ended. Aguas del Tunari brought an
arbitration claim against the Bolivian government
for $25 million in compensation.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and
Cultural Rights, and a wide range of other agreements
unequivocally provide that all persons are entitled to
the full realization of economic, social, and cultural
rights. In November 2002, the United Nations
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
adopted a General Comment on the right to water
(General Comment 15, the Right to Water,
U.N.Doc.E/C.12/2002/11) calling it a precondition
for the realization of all human rights. My report
discusses the obligations of states to prevent
programs of privatization of basic utilities from
depriving people of full enjoyment of these rights,
using water as the principal example.
One of our main concerns is the trend that
international
agreements
concerning
trade
liberalization and structural adjustment policies are
requiring these programs and inhibiting state’s
capacity to ensure the full realization of these
rights. Our hope is that if private companies will be
providing basic services to the populations their
activities will be monitored by states and
compliance with international human rights
instruments will be made mandatory.
Privatization programs in Africa and South
America exemplify the problems associated with
public companies providing basic services where
profit is the overriding motive, and the state has failed
to provide necessary oversight. As a result, water has
become increasingly expensive and systems of
management by exclusion have exacerbated extreme
and endemic poverty throughout the continent.
HRA’s statement under Agenda Item 10 is
E/CN.4?2003/NGO/_.
In South Africa and Bolivia, the World Bank
has encouraged privatization in an effort to bring
basic utilities to millions of new users. Instead,
prices have soared, leaving many without access
when they were unable to pay their bills. Cape
Town’s privately run water company cut off water to
The Juvenile Death Penalty
by Sarah Canepa and Hae Won Paik
(Anne James contributed to this article)
11
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
We attended the 59th Session of the United
Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva to
work on the issue of the juvenile death penalty.
Several treaties prohibit the execution of persons who
were under the age of 18 at the commission of the
crime. A recent decision by the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights affirmed that the
prohibition against the execution of juvenile
offenders constitutes a jus cogens norm, a preemptory
norm of international law recognized and accepted by
the international community and from which no
derogations is permitted. (See Report No. 62/02, Case
No. 12.285 Domingues v. United States). Thus, the
prohibition against the execution of persons under the
age of 18 at the time of the commission of the crime
is not only customary international law, it has
attained the status of jus cogens.
The UNHRC is a dynamic forum where
much can be achieved. This year our expectations,
however, were guarded on the issue of juvenile
death penalty. Within the first few days of arrival,
our concerns were realized. Our efforts have been
met with varying degrees of success over the
previous years on the issue of juvenile death
penalty and death penalty in general. One of our
main achievements from the previous year was to
insert an article calling for the abolition of the
juvenile death penalty under agenda item 13, rights
of the child. This we accomplished, despite the
article being somewhat diluted to ensure its
retention. This year however, the United States
was determined to “right the wrongs” as they see
them caused by the insertion in many resolutions of
additions they did not want. These insertions had
been accomplished in the one year that the US did
not have a vote on the Commission.
Prior to attending the Commission, we
prepared and submitted a written statement describing
the current practice of juvenile offender executions.
(See E/CN/.4/2003/NGO/41). Countries worldwide
have demonstrated near universal compliance with
the prohibition of juvenile offenders. In the last ten
years, sic countries have executed juvenile offenders:
Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Nigeria,
Pakistan, Yemen, and the United States. The number
of countries imposing the juvenile death penalty has
steadily decreased. In 2002, the United States was
the only country to execute juvenile offenders. The
United States executed 3 juvenile offenders, all of
them in Texas. In addition, there are approximately
80 juvenile offenders currently on death row. The
United States is not only the most egregious violator
of the customary international norm prohibiting the
execution of juvenile offenders, executing 16 of the
24 juvenile offenders executed in the last 10 years,
the United States now stands alone as the sole
country maintaining the practice of the juvenile death
penalty.
One of our goals this year was to present to
the United States delegations statistics showing that
the American public does not support the juvenile
death penalty to counter statements made by the
United States at last year’s Commission. Last year,
the United States defended its practice by stating
that it merely reflects the democratic process in the
states. We collected evidence of polls conducted
on this issue and found that the public has never
strongly supported the juvenile death penalty. A
recent Gallup Poll found that 69% of the public
opposed the juvenile death penalty. Even in Texas,
the legislature in 2001 adopted a law raising the age
to 18 but the governor vetoed it. We presented this
information to the United States delegation but did
not get any indication that it would reconsider its
position on the juvenile death penalty. In fact, we
spoke to another member of the delegation who
indicated that the juvenile death penalty was not a
pressing matter for the United States because it
affects so few individuals.
We recommended that the Commission urge
the Economic and Social Council to seek an advisory
opinion from the International Court of Justice,
recognizing that the juvenile death penalty is
prohibited as a matter of customary international law
and has risen to the level of a jus cogens norm. We
also asked the Commission to call upon all states that
still maintain the juvenile death penalty to abolish the
practice and to submit annual reports detailing efforts
to end juvenile offender executions.
In light of this comment, we were surprised
to see the United States try to weaken and even cut
the juvenile death penalty resolution language. The
United States attempted to weaken the resolution
language by limiting its application to those
countries that have ratified the Convention on the
Rights of the Child. Since the U.S. has not ratified
this instrument, we tried to strengthen the
resolution language so that all countries abolish the
juvenile death penalty.
Although we were
unsuccessful in strengthening the language, as it
12
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
by Conchita Lozano-Batista and Jeanna Steele
now stands the resolution arguably applies to all
countries, including the United States.
This spring, we worked on human rights issues
that face migrant workers. Our work at the
Commission on Human Rights focused on the
adoption of more concrete measures to ensure the
right to life of migrant workers on borders and to
protect workplace rights of migrants. We drafted
various reports, an oral and written statement, a
briefing paper, and resolution language on these
topics.
In addition, we successfully lobbied
countries to include new protections for migrant
workers in the resulting resolutions. Our work at
the Commission was extremely rewarding and
meaningful and we would like to thank Connie de
la Vega, Human Rights Advocates and U.S.F. for
this unique opportunity.
We worked with Professor de la Vega and
Anne James, an attorney from D.C., to lobby various
delegations to ensure that the resolution would not be
weakened or cut. We spoke to several countries of
the European Union, including Portugal, Ireland,
Spain, Greece, and the U.K. The Greek delegation,
speaking on behalf of the European Union, stated its
support for the abolition of the juvenile death penalty.
We gave our materials to Switzerland, who has been
very supportive of the abolition of the juvenile death
penalty. Switzerland used this information to ask the
Special Rapporteur whether the prohibition against
the juvenile death penalty is a jus cogens norm. We
also spoke to Iran, Brazil, Mexico, Chile, Uruguay,
and Pakistan. Pakistan is one of the past violators so
we were happy when they expressed support for the
resolution against the juvenile death penalty. When
the United States made attempts to delete a part of the
resolution language, we asked Pakistan to push for
keeping the resolution language and they indicted that
they would be willing to ensure that the resolution
language would not be weakened.
BORDER DEATHS OF MIGRANT WORKERS
Migration is increasingly a major policy
concern in a shrinking world, where more and more
people look to migration as a path to employment,
education, freedom or other opportunities. Today,
one of every 35 people is a migrant and migrants
compose 2.9 percent of the world population. The
human rights of migrants deserve greater attention.
Trafficked migrants are routinely exploited,
mistreated or even killed. State border policies put
migrants’ lives at risk and migrant workers often
find themselves without protection or recourse.
On April 25, 2003, the Commission adopted,
without a vote, the resolution on the rights of the
child. Before the adoption of the resolution, The
United States requested a separate vote on the
juvenile death penalty paragraph. The Commission
decided to retain the paragraph, in a recorded vote of
51 in favor and 1 against. The United States flatly
opposed the resolution language calling for the
abolition of the death penalty for juvenile offenders,
despite statistics showing that the American public
does not support the execution of juvenile offenders.
While we regret the position of the United States, we
are thrilled so many nations supported the juvenile
death penalty resolution language and that it will in
fact remain intact.
Border death statistics are difficult to collect
and often under-reported. Migrants die in the
desert or on the high seas and may never be found.
And, since many countries regard the trafficking of
migrants to be illegal, they do not report violations
resulting from this trade.
U.N. instruments such as the recently ratified
Convention on Migrant Workers and the
International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights
guarantee the right to life for migrant workers.
This right is violated by countries whose border
policies force migrants’ into dangerous crossings
that will likely result in death. While countries
have a right to police their borders, they must do so
in a humane manner.
We would like to thank Professor de la Vega
and Human Rights Advocates for the opportunity to
attend the Human Rights Commission. Overall, our
experience at the United Nations was an invaluable
one. We not only enhanced our advocacy and
lobbying skills but learned about the inner workings
of the Commission and the impact NGO’s can have
in improving human rights.
Along the U.S./Mexico border, new border
walls and intensified border patrols channel
migrants into more dangerous routes resulting in
death by dehydration, hypothermia and drowning.
Migrant Workers
13
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41

Migrants die at a rate of one person per day, and since
1994, when the U.S. implemented tougher border
policies such as Operation Gatekeeper in San Diego,
at least 2, 200 people have died. The increase in
deaths in Tucson, Arizona alone was 133% in 2002
from the previous year. Increased militarization of the
border has also resulted in the use of high speech
chases, which should have been aborted as the risk to
life escalated. Since January 2003, four migrants
have been killed. Thirty-six migrants have died in
similar crashes since 1994.
Much of the language we proposed to Mexico
and Ecuador before the start of the Commission
was present in the resolution when we arrived. We
attended two resolution drafting meetings where
there was little opposition to our recommendations
and, as a result, our recommendations were
preserved.
We also met with the Special
Rapporteur on Migrants, giving her a summary of
our research on migrant deaths in the Straits of
Gibraltar, to assist her in her upcoming fact-finding
trip to Spain. We were successful in getting her to
recognize the problem of deaths on borders and
hope that she will continue to focus on this issue.
Should a migrant be lucky enough to survive the
brutal desert crossing and elude border patrols, there
is still another danger ahead. U.S. ranchers and
others have formed vigilante groups: tracking,
harassing and sometimes killing migrants found
crossing the border with impunity. In August of
2002, a rancher killed a migrant who had entered his
property to ask for water. He was convicted of
manslaughter and fined $4,000.
WORKPLACE RIGHTS OF MIGRANT WORKERS
In working on the workplace rights of migrant
workers, we urged states to adopt better measures
to protect these rights. We reported on worldwide
violations of migrant workers’ workplace rights and
paid special attention to violations of these rights in
the United States.
In Western Europe, the situation is much worse
where 300,000-500,000 migrants arrive yearly via the
Straits of Gibraltar. At least 3,026 migrants have
died trying to reach Europe since 1993 and 730
people have been rescued in the Straits since 2000
and several thousand people are likely to have
drowned. Despite tougher immigration laws, the
flood of immigrants increased by 30 percent in 2002.
Migrant workers’ rights in the workplace are
protected under various international instruments.
Article 7 of the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
provides migrant workers with the right to “[s]afe
and healthy working conditions.” Additionally, the
ICESCR provides migrants the right to fair wages,
and the right to join and form trade unions.
Migrant workers’ right to organize is also protected
by the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR), to which the U.S. is a party.
Interior enforcement offers a more humane
solution to the problem of irregular migration by
addressing the issue of demand, a major factor in
migration. However, workplace enforcement efforts
dropped 97 percent between 1999 and 2001 and over
five times more resources are devoted to border
enforcement than to interior enforcement.
Our recommendations to the Commission on the
issue of border deaths included:



Combining border control with humane
guest worker programs, employer sanctions
and workplace enforcement efforts.
In addition, migrant worker rights are often
also protected under domestic laws of most
countries. However, many of these domestic laws
lack enforcement mechanisms or do not provide
sufficient protections for workers bringing claims
against their employers.
Urging the Commission to encourage
governments to abandon immigration policies
that push migrants into dangerous crossings,
Encouraging coordination between sending
and receiving countries,
The strengthening of existing penalties for
traffickers and vigorously prosecuting acts
that violate migrant’s human rights,
In the U.S., employers are increasingly fighting
unionization campaigns by firing or threatening
undocumented workers, thwarting labor
organizers and defying immigration law.
Meanwhile, retaliatory firings increase, as
unions aggressively recruit immigrants and the
14
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
economy employs more undocumented workers.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently approved of
employers’ use of retaliatory firings by holding
that undocumented migrant workers could be
fired for unionization efforts without backpay
liability to the employer. This decision violates
Article 22 of the ICCPR and enables employers
to exploit migrant workers and fire them once
they begin to demand better working conditions.
This decision has already resulted in increased
harassment to migrants suing employers for
violation of various workplace rights and courts
around the U.S. have made attempts to expand
the scope of this decision into other areas that
traditionally protected the rights of migrant
workers.
prosecuting violations of labor law with regard to
conditions of work, including those related to
remuneration and conditions of health and safety at
work. We also raised the issues that have arisen
after the Hoffman Plastics decision with Mexico
and provided them with documentation of attempts
to expand the decision. This is important as this
issue is now being reviewed at the Inter-American
Court of Human Rights. In light of this, we also
discussed strategies with Mexico on how to
approach this topic next year at the Commission,
once the IACHR decision is issued.
PROTECTION FOR MIGRANT WORKERS IN
TIMES OF HEIGHTENED NATIONAL SECURITY
There is growing concern about violations of
the rights of migrant workers by countries enacting
national security policies that target immigrants. In
addition to our work on workplace rights and
border deaths, we worked closely with the
governments of Mexico, Ecuador and Pakistan to
draft language that ensured that the rights of
migrant workers, as provided for under national and
international law, would be protected by states
enacting national security measures.
We
successfully lobbied the U.S. government to allow
for this protection to be included in the final
resolution and helped establish a precedent for
addressing these types of concerns in the future.
Migrant sweatshop workers both in the U.S. and
abroad are subjected to violations of workplace
rights. Seven-day workweeks, extremely low wages
and eighty-hour working weeks are common. The
health and safety of workers, mostly women, is
constantly undermined. Women are discriminated
against and harassed, sometimes sexually, and there
is evidence of bonded and child labor in many
countries.
Due to the continuing violation of migrant
workers’ rights in the workplace, we made various
recommendations to the Commission that included:
 Seeking
greater
compliance
with
international law protecting the workplace
rights of migrants.
 Requesting that the Special Rapporteur
review what government laws are not in
compliance with international law, and to
identify what steps are necessary so that laws
apply uniformly to all business enterprises
worldwide.
 Requesting that states ensure that their laws
are in conformity with international law, and
to firmly prosecute cases of violation of
national and international labor law with
regard to migrant workers' conditions of
work,
including
those
related
to
remuneration, association rights, and the
conditions of health and safety at work.
A summary of our report can be found by
going to http://www.unhchr.ch/, clicking on
Documents, then 59th Session, then NGO written
Statements and going to Document Number:
E/CN.4/2003/NGO/42.
The results of our
lobbying can be seen in the final resolution
(Document Number: E/CN.4/Res/2003/46,) which
was adopted by general consensus.
Amicus Brief to Supreme Court on
University of Michigan Affirmative
Action Programs
by Conchita Lozano-Batista and Sayareh Dehzad
This spring we worked with Prof. de la Vega,
Human Rights Advocates, and the University of
Minnesota Human Rights Center to draft and
submit an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in the
cases of Grutter v. Bollinger, 122 F. Supp. 3d 732
We were very successful in including new
protections in the resulting resolutions and in raising
various issues with particular countries. Specifically,
we were able to get paragraph included on
15
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
(6th Cir. 2002), cert. granted, No. 02-241 (2003), and
Gratz v. Bollinger, 122 F. Supp. 2d 811 (E.D. Mich.
2000), cert. granted, No. 02-516 (2003). These cases
challenged the University of Michigan’s Affirmative
Action programs for both the undergraduate and law
school campuses.
Though the University of
Michigan’s programs were narrowly tailored to meet
the demanding criteria established in Bakke for
constitutionally acceptable affirmative action
programs, unsuccessful white applicants to the
undergraduate and law school programs challenged
the constitutionality of the affirmative action
programs.
In Grutter v. Bollinger, 529 U.S. __ (2003), Justice
Ginsburg concurred with the court's opinion
holding that the University of Michigan Law
School's admission program's "narrowly tailored
use of race in admissions decisions to further a
compelling interest in obtaining the educational
benefits that flow from a diverse student body
[was] not prohibited by the equal protection clause"
and noted that the court's decision was consistent
with the international understanding of affirmative
action. Justice Ginsburg wrote: The Court's
observation that race-conscious programs "must
have a logical end point," [], accords with the
international understanding of the office of
affirmative action. The International Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination, [] endorses "special and concrete
measures to ensure the adequate development and
protection of certain racial groups or individuals
belonging to them, for the purpose of guaranteeing
them the full and equal enjoyment of
human rights and fundamental freedoms." [ Art.
2(2)]. But such measures, the Convention instructs,
"shall in no case entail as a consequence the
maintenance of unequal or separate rights for
different racial groups after the objectives for which
they were taken have been achieved." [Ibid. see
also Art. 1(4)] (similarly providing for temporally
limited affirmative action); Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women, [Art. 4(1)] (authorizing "temporary special
measures
aimed
at
accelerating
de facto equality" that "shall be discontinued when
the objectives of equality of opportunity and
treatment have been achieved"). [citations omitted]
The
decision
is
available
at:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/02pdf/02241.pdf
In Gratz v. Bollinger, 529 U.S. __ (2003)
Justice Ginsburg's dissent makes the point that "the
Constitution is color conscious to prevent
discrimination being perpetuated and to undo the
effects of past discrimination. [citations and internal
quotations omitted]." She then notes that
"contemporary human rights documents draw just
this line; they distinguish between policies of
oppression and measures designed to accelerate de
facto
equality.[citations
to
Grutter
and
CERD and CEDAW omitted]"The decision is
available
at:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/02pdf/02516.pdf
Our brief to the Supreme Court focused on
international law arguments. We argued that a
reversal of the decision to uphold the admissions
policies would conflict with U.S. treaty obligations
under the International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(ICERD) and the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR), to which the U.S. is a party.
Both treaties contain provisions allowing for and
encouraging the use of affirmative action programs to
remedy past discrimination. Treaty provisions are
considered to be “supreme law of the land” under
Article VI of the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. is
bound to protect the rights enumerated in these
treaties. We argued that a reversal of the lower
court’s decision would impair the ability of state and
local governmental entities to institute measures
designed to meet U.S. treaty obligations.
The decision in these cases is still pending. (See
below for update.) However, over 70 groups
submitted briefs requesting that the Supreme Court
uphold the use of the University’s admission policy.
These groups were very diverse in their interests and
included many Fortune 500 companies, senior
members of the armed services, the American Bar
Association, and various universities around the
nation.
A listing of all amicus briefs submitted in this case,
including
ours,
can
be
found
at:
http://www.umich.edu/~urel/admissions/legal/gru_a
micus-ussc/um.html
Supreme Court Decisions
Justice Ginsberg cites International
Human Rights Law
16
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
Thanks for Cindy Soohoo of the Columbia Human Rights
Institute for compiling the above information.

THE CENTRE ON HOUSING RIGHTS AND
EVICTIONS (COHRE)

by Birte Scholz

COHRE is a non-governmental organization that
promotes and protects economic, social and cultural
rights, and specifically the right to housing, for
everyone everywhere. I am the Coordinator of the
Women and Housing Rights programme.

For this dream position I must give many
thanks to the Frank C. Newman Internship
programme of HRA. As an intern at the 56th Session
of the UN Commission on Human Rights
(“UNHCR”), I spoke on the correlation between
domestic violence and the right to adequate housing.
I remained active in the area by attending th Beijing
Plus Five conference in 2000 and the Habitat
Conference in 2001.


The job opened at COHRE, I applied, and
was granted the amazing opportunity to work on the
right to adequate housing for women throughout the
world, with an organization that is at the forefront of
the promotion and protection of human rights. A
dream human rights job is possible, especially when
connected to Human Rights Advocates!
Close to one third of the world’s population
of women live with inadequate or no
housing whatsoever.
Women perform two-thirds of the world’s
total working hours, yet they own less the
one percent of the world’s property.
Women and girl children make up 80
percent of the world’s estimated 50 million
refugees and internally displaced persons.
In many countries, especially in Africa and
South Asia, women are systematically
denied land ownership or inheritance
rights. In Nigeria, for example, women’s
socio-economic status prevents them from
owning property albeit at the mercy of a
male relative.
Rape is used as a “tool” to forcibly remove
women from their homes before and during
forced evictions.
In many countries, the majority of
homeless women are escaping situations of
domestic violence.
An estimated 60
percent of homeless women in the United
States are escaping batterers at home.
Gender inequity gives rise to several barriers
that the WHRP believes are combatable from a
human rights perspective: lack of information,
education and training with regards to the right to
housing; lack of collective action focused on
women’s right to adequate housing; a belief that
housing, especially for women, should be left to the
private sphere; unaccountable and insensitive
governments; inaccessible and gender insensitive
courts that lack knowledge with regards to the right
to housing; and an overall disregard of the
importance that the human right to housing plays,
especially for women.
Women and Housing
Today over 70 percent of the world’s
estimated 1.6 billion inadequately housed are female.
Thousands of these women die per day as a result of
preventable disease due to a lack of access to
adequate housing and related services such as water
and sanitation, as well as from violence perpetrated
against them in the home.
The right to adequate housing is enshrined in
the International Human Bill of Rights, comprised
of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Right and the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights.
While lack of access to stable and secure
housing adversely affects all, women bear the brunt
of this universal housing crisis. Lack of secure
housing deprives women of economic autonomy,
physical safety and personal dignity, and serves to
further marginalize women by contributing to their
poverty and continued social subjugation.
Housing rights refer not only to a “home,” but
also embrace fundamental procedural, remedial,
security and non-material aspects.
In sum,
advocating for a woman’s realization of the right to
housing is an important step in her attainment of
other fundamental human rights, increasing her
Women experience the violation of the right to
adequate housing in distinct ways:
17
Human Rights Advocates
Vol. 41
autonomy and allowing her to live a more full and
dignified life.
COHRE along with several other
organizations such as Huairou Commission, Habitat
International Coalition, Human Rights Watch and
several others utilized the UNCHR 59th Session to
launch a Global Working Group on Women
Housing, Land and Property.
This was an
opportune moment, as women and housing was a
theme at this year´s UNCHR pursuant to the
mandate given last year to the Special Rapporteur
on housing to submit a report examining women
and housing (E/CN.4/2003/55).
UNCHR: Resolution on Women, Housing,
Land and Property and the U.S.
The WHRP has been instrumental in passing
resolutions at the UNCHR on women’s right to
housing, land and property, and was once again this
year- despite heavy opposition from the U.S.
This year the U.S. proposed a ‘small’
amendment to an operative paragraph the resolution,
to remove the words ‘right to’ from before the words’
adequate housing’. The U.S. position is that the right
to adequate housing is not a critical component to the
right to an adequate standard of living, a position that
has never gained favour with most States.
The first meeting of the Global Working
Group was a great success. The group serves as a
discussion forum, sharing thoughts, ideas and work
plans, and to bring together women working on
housing/land issues from all over the world.
If you would like to find out more about the
right to adequate housing generally or for women in
particular, please see www.cohre.org, or email the
WRHP at birte@cohre.org. Additionally, COHRE
submitted a written statement on women and the
right to housing, property and land under
E/CN.4/2003/NGO/266.
Mexico, the State party who brought the
resolution, stood by undaunted and called for a vote
on the ‘small’ amendment. The amendment was
victoriously voted down, 36 no’s to 3 yea’s, including
the U.S., UK and Australia. Several key European
allies abstained.
The U.S. did not oppose the general housing
resolution, ‘Adequate housing as a component of an
adequate standard of living’ (E/Cn.4/2003/27), but it
delivered a statement before the vote arguing that a
State is not responsible for providing adequate
housing to its populace, and that housing is merely a
component to an adequate standard of living, not a
right.
The U.S. was correct in stating that
international jurisprudence does not require the state
to build a home for all, but it does require a state to
ensure that its populace can afford housing adequate
to live a life of dignity.
Special thanks to Tina Camba, Frank C. Newman
Intern for the 59th Commission, for her meticulous
note taking and valuable advice.
Human Rights Advocates
P.O. Box 5675
Berkeley, CA 94705
www.humanrightsadvocates.org
Cindy Cohn
Connie de la Vega
Kristin Lamsen
Michelle Leighton
Nicole Phillips
Julianne Cartwright Traylor
Anne Wagley
Despite the U.S. interference, the Women’s
Equal Right To Access Control And Own Land And
Equal Right To Own Property And To Adequate
Housing’ (E/CN.4/2003/42) passed the UNCHR
without a vote. The U.S.’s position luckily does not
reflects the impetus of the majority of the world, and
international law in its current form.
Working Group on Women, Housing,
Land and Property
18