Justice for all

At my internship last summer, what I really took away was the importance of pioneering a new approach to human rights. The 20th century approach to human rights was in defining human rights standards - like the International Covenants on Civil & Political Rights, and Economic, Social, & Cultural rights. I’m sure you know how incredibly important these covenants were - they revolutionized the way of thinking about human rights, and they provide some benchmark through which to keep countries accountable. They provided NGOs with a guideline - what standards to follow, what rights to lobby for. They provide a pathway forward. The debate still continues about economic, social, and cultural rights: what obligation does this mean, exactly, for governments? Many people still argue about how exactly to implement these standards.

But this hasn’t been enough, and what we need now is a new and different approach. We need to shift away from a time of declaration and into the era of implementation.

What does this mean? It means we have many of the right laws on the books, particularly enshrined in international covenants and agreements, but we simply haven’t been able to implement these laws properly. Even though the current debate is about social & economic rights - in particular, the rights to things like health, education, credit, water, or even “development” - the older, more accepted civil and political rights are not guaranteed in most countries, either.

Organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch - the two most prominent human rights organizations of our time - are doing amazing work in terms of bringing to light the human rights abuses taking place around the globe. However, while Amnesty’s work might result in releasing individual political prisoners, this approach to human rights lobbying and petitioning does not result in systematic transformation. While Amnesty’s lobbying might get a few political prisoners out of jail, the original system that oppressed them and their rights remains. Some might be saved, but more and more will continue to be imprisoned, tortured, or threatened in other ways.

What is needed is systematic change. The systems need to change, themselves, in order for lasting change to occur. Like any other aid organization, the work done by Amnesty is simply like a band-aid on a gashing wound if the broader system and situation in the relevant country does not change. The goal is not just to save individual people, but to change the system and address the root of the problem such that in the future, more people do not undergo the same fate.

How can this be achieved? Systematic change mostly depends on democratization and good governance. It depends on instituting leaders who are accountable to their people and genuinely want to contribute to development and positive social change for people in their countries. In countries with dictators, extremely weak or collapsed governments, or perhaps worst, genocidal governments and leaders, the efforts of human rights organizations simply cannot have a lasting effect. Both an overly strong state/dictatorship and an extremely weak, failed government are both recipes for chaos and violations of civil and political rights.

And at the local level, everyday people are being tortured, denied access to lawyers, and suffer for years in jails without ever going to trial. Prison conditions in many developing countries are terrible. I’ve written about this before. How does systematic transformation work here? Building up domestic legal systems: putting in place more legal aid lawyers, trained judges, prosecutors, paralegals, and other stakeholders who are desperately needed to end legal abuse and human rights violations. Police forces have to be trained in non-coercive interrogation methods.

We need more systematic approaches to addressing civil & political rights by changing the system, and by implementing rights standards on a local level - especially in the latter area (improving legal systems). Why is there so much focus on the former, individualized approach and less focus on systematic reform? It’s a lot harder, a lot more complex, and a lot less straightforward, that’s for sure. But it’s needed if we are to progress in systematic change in the human rights arena.

Recently, I started following Susanne on Twitter. She often tweets interesting and relevant news related to human rights and international issues, and by following her I ensure I’m always up to date about the latest human rights news. Please read on for fascinating insights on human rights, and what you can do to get involved in the movement.

Name: Susanne Ure
Occupation: Web Editor
Employer: Amnesty International Canada
Employer Website: http://www.amnesty.ca
Employer Twitter: @amnesty (USA) @amnestynews (USA) @amnestyOZ (Australia) @amnestynl (Netherlands) @AmnestyUK (United Kingdom) @AmnestyOnline (International Secretariat – London)
Twitter: @SusanneUre
Facebook: http://profile.to/sure/
Education: In 1981 I graduated from Queens University in Kingston, Ontario, Canada with a B.A. in Drama. I was given the Theatre History Prize. The Principal sent me a letter expressing high hopes for my future. On my last visit to my thesis advisor’s office he asked me what I intended to do after graduation. I laughed out loud and said that, with a degree in theatre I didn’t have very good prospects, especially in the midst of a recession (my first recession!) and observed that he would probably find me at the car wash. “Beggars can’t be choosers,” I said. He responded with the best advice I never took: “If you’re choosy, you won’t be a beggar for long.” I went to graduate school and studied for my M.A in theatre, and then, for one year, pursued a PhD, both at the University of Toronto. I ended up working in the arts for years.

Interests: Human rights and social justice; the arts, fine and lively; the internet and other wizardly things; traveling, photography and design.

What or who first inspired you to get into human rights work?

I skipped my first week of graduate school at the University of Toronto in September of 1981 to attend a conference entitled “The Writer and Human Rights” put together by eminent Canadian novelists Margaret Atwood and Timothy Findley for PEN, the proceeds of which went to Amnesty International.

There I signed my first postcard on behalf of a Chinese Prisoner of Conscience, Yang Ch’ing-ch’u, a writer from the Republic of China (Taiwan), serving a prison sentence of four years and two months, imposed after he had taken part in a demonstration in December 1979 to mark the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At the time he was on the editorial committee of the opposition magazine Formosa.

While he was in prison, Yang wrote a poem by Chinese poet Gu Cheng on the wall of his cell: “I want to paint windows all over the world, and let those who are accustomed to the darkness grow accustomed to the light.”

That focused everything for me. I spent the next 20+ years as an arts activist and as a labour activist. In 2005 a job came up at Amnesty Canada which seemed like my “inevitable place”, so I signed on.

What do you do at Amnesty International?

I’m responsible for running www.amnesty.ca in collaboration with the media officers, campaigners and fundraisers at Amnesty’s Canadian section. The ‘web department’ is a one-person operation, so I do publishing, development, design, content creation, strategy & planning, reporting and evaluation, project management, as well staff support and training. In my spare time I contribute to online campaigning initiatives and communications strategy.

What is the biggest challenge you personally face while working in the human rights field?

There is no limit or end to the number of issues, incidents and people who need attention, support, help, or intervention. There are, unfortunately, limits to the amount of time, energy and material resources available to address these needs. The biggest challenge is to maintain balance and resilience in a state of being constantly overwhelmed.

You tweet a lot about recent human rights news. Why do you tweet? Do you see the potential in social media in building a movement for human rights?

Why do I tweet? That’s an interesting question. I’ve just been doing it seriously for a couple of months, trying it out as a medium for human rights work. It feels like I just got swept up in it. I am, in essence, a storyteller. I seek out stories in order to be able experience and understand more of what it means to be human in the world than I would just living my everyday life, in order to feel and share my humanity with others, and to feel and share their humanity. Twitter is an extraordinary medium for that kind of exchange. It allows me to share the stories I come across and talk about them with others who value them as much as I do.

For me, the first and most crucial part of human rights work is in building awareness and knowledge about what’s really going on in the world, and not only the challenges and the bone-suffering, but the resilience, ingenuity, heroism, aspirations and yearning of people everywhere. I believe that when people are genuinely and directly connected to others, they will help. They will do what they can. When they understand what is wanted and needed they will step in. They just need to know what’s going on. The world changes one newly-engaged person at a time. Twitter, I’m finding, is a significant platform for this kind of work.

What do you think is the most critical human rights issue facing us today?

Governance. We as individuals, in groups and communities can challenge human rights violations and mitigate abuses only so far. We need societal leaders and governments to step up and adopt and work within international human rights law and standards. Governments can make a huge impact by embracing human rights for all as a fundamental principle of governance. Amnesty International is uniquely positioned to uncover the truth about discreet and systemic human rights abuses, and to call societal leaders and governments to account for their failure to provide for the universal dignity and wellbeing of those for whom they are responsible. That’s primarily why I find it so compelling to work within this particular movement.

What’s the best thing people can do to get involved in advocating for human rights on a regular basis?

Treat human rights advocacy not an area of specialization but as an everyday practice, for everyone. Commit the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to heart. Apply its principles to your daily life. Refer to it in your discussions and debates about rights and wrongs. Recall Eleanor Roosevelt’s words about where human rights really live:

“Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home - so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world.”

Don’t let injustices, toward yourself or others go by unchallenged. This is often very hard to do, but it’s very necessary. It never gets easier, but when change comes it’s brilliant, it lights up the whole sky, for you and everybody else. That’s something you definitely want to experience in your life.

What advice would you give to a young person interested in human rights and social change?

Most young people I meet who are on the front lines of human rights work and social justice initiatives are supreme commanders of the universe. I’m generally dazzled by the passion, knowledge, and discipline they bring. They inspire and invigorate me and every campaign they participate in.

In terms of advice, I think many young people already know instinctively how to identify injustice and what needs to be done to address it. They can feel it in their hearts.

As time goes by, however, it gets harder to challenge injustice, particularly in “small places” where you are personally implicated. Life becomes evermore complicated and demanding, and the risks, both personal and for the community at large, become greater. “Advocacy” and ‘activism” are often is read as “insubordination”, an assault on the entitlements of the powerful, and are punished accordingly.

There is power in numbers. My advice would be to find like-minded people who share your ideals, discipline and vision. Find or create a community that you can draw strength from and give strength to. You will need this as a human rights/social justice activist in order to make a lifetime practice out of pursuing a better world.

I remember when I graduated from Queen’s University the commencement speaker gave a speech called “Brave for Life”. I didn’t fully appreciate how important that advice would be – how important courage would be as staple of a life well-lived - but I do now. So I pass that on too.

This is a topic that has been swirling around in my mind for months, but I’ve never really garnered the courage to write it down coherently. But now, as I embark on a journey to work with International Bridges to Justice (IBJ) in Geneva this summer, this topic is becoming increasingly relevant to my work.

I am passionate about working to end human rights abuses, and I realize that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are two of the most prominent organizations working to raise awareness of human rights violations across the globe. Their work has been indispensable in terms of uncovering the truth of human rights abuses in various countries through intensive research, and in pressuring governments to take action by way of international exposure, letter writing, and petition signing. I think advocacy and raising awareness is absolutely vital if we are to end ongoing violations. After all, if the public doesn’t know about these situations, then how can people take action to end these problems? The popular mobilization and awareness that Amnesty has achieved over the years is truly remarkable. However, I wonder whether advocacy is the most effective method of combating human rights abuses, especially in the long-run.

First, it seems to me that political situations are very difficult to change. Especially, international civil society does not seem to exert significant influence on the political climates in many countries. Even if a huge amount of pressure is placed upon government heads through activities like protests and petitions, how much is this really going to change? And if the international community has heightened awareness of an issue, does this really change things on the ground? For instance, there is a huge amount of awareness within the U.S. and U.K at least regarding the genocide in Darfur. Many organizations like Save Darfur and STAND have mobilized many people and large amounts of money and time in order to raise awareness of the genocide and try to stop it, especially through political pressure and pleas for divestment from Sudan. Many successes have been achieved, most importantly widespread knowledge of the situation and recognition that it is genocide and must be stopped. Yet even after all this, Sudanese President Al-Bashir is still going strong and little has changed over the years. The genocide is continuing. President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton are yet to take a strong stance on ending the genocide. Has this impressive popular mobilization and heightened awareness done much at all? True, I am pinpointing a specific situation – but it does leave me feeling that there must be more that we can do than raise awareness. Because it simply doesn’t seem enough to me.

Moreover, many human rights advocacy organizations hold large campaigns to free single persons from prison, especially those who were imprisoned for political reasons. But I have to ask: does this really lead to large scale social change? Organizations have campaigned for years and succeeded in freeing political prisoners, but this is only one situation, one person. But does this sort of advocacy force the government to think twice the next time it wants to imprison someone for political (or any other) reasons? I don’t see that happening enough. And what about all the everyday cases, when people are being imprisoned for petty crimes, when the local police is incredibly corrupt, when men and women are tortured unnecessarily, when poor prisoners aren’t granted a lawyer or a fair trial? While a political prisoner is a special case, regular citizens are being punished unfairly everyday and aren’t being recognized by the international community. Does advocacy fail here? Who’s fighting for the unheard prisoners? Too often their voices go unheard, even within international civil society.

Here is when I think a different model needs to be employed in order to effectively fight human rights abuses. We need to improve local justice systems and work with governments, not just against them, in order to reform the criminal justice systems. We have to train local police forces and make them understand that torture is unacceptable, and is not necessary in order to extract information from prisoners. We need to ensure that every poor person has the right to a lawyer and the right to a fair trial. I feel like this bottom-up approach can be truly effective, and combined with advocacy and raising awareness can be very powerful. If we start at the bottom through criminal justice reform in developing countries, we can build up strong legal institutions that will eventually create precedents for not using torture or unfair detainment – which will trickle upwards and prevent the government from detaining political prisoners or exercising their power arbitrarily. IBJ focuses on this approach to grassroots criminal justice reform, and I think it is a unique yet effective method of combating torture.

I think advocacy and activism needs to be combined with action and results. Real systematic change happens on the ground, step-by-step and day by day. One model I like is that of Physicians for Human Rights, an organization which not only has advocacy campaigns but also concrete projects that help people by the day - like the asylum network which assists asylum seekers by documenting forensic evidence of torture and abuse. Another example is Invisible Children, an organization based on a documentary about child soldiers in Northern Uganda. In addition to raising awareness through the documentary, they also have a book drive, build schools, and sell bracelets and give the revenue to the bracelet makers, provide scholarships to children, and have a Savings and Training Initiative which is basically a microfinance scheme. Of course, I don’t think some of their campaigns are the best idea (abduct yourself? really?), but they have a good basic model for combining raising awareness with actual results. I also love Human Rights First, which combines much advocacy and petitioning with projects that represent asylum seekers and help refugees resettle in the U.S.

So ultimately, I’m not saying advocacy is not necessary. I just think that there needs to be so much more if systematic, widespread change is to happen.

Image credit: flicker user bashaspix

“We are gratified for this acknowledgement that the concern for peace and the promotion of human rights are inseparable. Peace is not to be measured by the absence of conventional war, but constructed upon foundations of justice. Where there is injustice, there is the seed of conflict. Where human rights are violated, there are threats to peace…

The integral relationship between the cause of peace and the concern for human dignity was perhaps an all too obvious and easily reached conclusion in the aftermath of a universal holocaust. But with the passage of time this vision of the just society as a precondition to a peaceful world has grown dim. The vision must not be lost.

People everywhere need to be continually reminded that violations of human rights, whether arbitrary arrest and detention, unjust imprisonment, torture, or political assassination, are threats to world peace. Each violation, wherever it occurs, can set in motion a trend towards the debasement of human dignity. From individuals to groups, from groups to nations, from nations to groups of nations, in chain reaction a pattern sets in, a pattern of violence and repression and a lack of concern for human welfare.

This must never be allowed to start. And the place to stop it is at the level of the individual. Therefore, the protection of the rights of the individual to think freely, to express himself freely, to associate freely with others and to disseminate his thoughts is essential to the preservation of world peace.”

– Amnesty International Nobel Peace Prize Lecture