Human Rights Council Hears that States Need to Expand International Solidarity Measures to Diminish Inequality and Marginalisation, and that the Backlash against Women’s and Girls’ Human Rights Is Intensifying

The Human Rights Council this afternoon held an interactive dialogue with the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity, and started an interactive dialogue with the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls.

Cecilia Bailliet, Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity, presented her first report addressing the participation of civil society organizations seeking to express international solidarity through transnational, international, and regional networks. She said international solidarity was a meta right tied to freedom of expression and association as well as equality and non-discrimination. Negative global trends of polarisation, inequality, and fragmentation were impeding dialogue, cooperation, and peaceful dispute resolution. She encouraged States to expand solidarity measures to diminish inequality and marginalisation and continue to share their best solidarity policies. She also called upon States to collaborate to form a Group of Friends to Adopt the Revised Draft Declaration on Human Rights and International Solidarity.

In the discussion on international solidarity, some speakers, among other things, said international solidarity was a fundamental principle of international law and was essential to address contemporary challenges such as extreme poverty, climate change and food insecurity. All stakeholders should uphold the principles of international solidarity for improving the culture of cooperation and for the aim of promoting human rights worldwide.

Some speakers said it was regrettable that the report failed to address the suffocation of international solidarity by the imposition of unilateral coercive measures. One speaker noted that the report had moved away from economic, social and cultural rights, particularly the right to development, by referring to human rights development, a dictate of countries of the North.

The Council then started an interactive dialogue with Dorothy Estrada-Tanck, Chair of the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls, who said the backlash against women’s and girls’ human rights was intensifying and had reached extreme proportions in certain countries. Retrogressive movements were jeopardising women’s and girls’ human rights, as well as the progress achieved in advancing gender equality in all regions of the world. The world was witnessing a growing backlash against sexual and reproductive health rights, including comprehensive education on sexual and reproductive health, ever-present misogynistic statements in the media and the rise of anti-gender discourse in the public domain, as well as attacks on women and girl human rights defenders. Afghanistan was an extreme example of gender backlash.

Ms. Estrada-Tanck said the Working Group had visited Mauritania and Malta and representatives of the two countries took the floor as countries concerned.

In the discussion, speakers, among other things, shared the concern of the Working Group at the “gender backlash” aimed at curtailing the equal enjoyment by women and girls. This backlash was undermining achievements and prospects for further progress and had reached extremely worrying proportions in certain countries. There needed to be concerted efforts led by the States, international organizations and religious organizations to counter discriminatory prejudices and stereotypes against women and girls, while charting a path towards the equal enjoyment of all their human rights.

Speaking in the dialogue on international solidarity were Venezuela on behalf of a group of countries, Egypt on behalf of the Group of Arab States, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Gambia on behalf of the Group of African States, Cuba on behalf of a group of countries, Bolivia, Armenia, Egypt, Luxembourg, Maldives, Algeria, Bangladesh, Iraq, Iran, Russian Federation, China, Tunisia, Cameroon, Cuba, Ghana, Venezuela, State of Palestine, Mauritania, Malawi, Kuwait, India, Qatar, Malaysia, Oman, South Africa and Vanuatu.

Also speaking were Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Institut International pour les Droits et le Développement, Al Tawasul Wa Al Ekah Human Organization, Shaanxi Patriotic Volunteer Association, Rajasthan Samgrah Kalyan Sansthan, BADIL Resource Centre for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, AKAHATÁ Equipo de Trabajo en Sexualidad y Géneros Asociación Civil, Centre for International Environmental Law (CIEL), International Service for Human Rights, and Global Action on Aging.

Speaking in the dialogue on discrimination against women and girls were Iran, Australia on behalf of a group of countries, Finland on behalf of a group of countries, European Union, Portugal on behalf of the Community of Portuguese Language Countries, Mexico on behalf of a group of countries, Gambia on behalf of the Group of African States, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Algeria on behalf of a group of countries, Belgium, Canada on behalf of a group of countries, Dominican Republic on behalf of a group of countries, United Nations Women, Peru, Ecuador, Chile, Germany, Costa Rica, Ireland, United Nations Children's Fund, United States of America, Kuwait , Morocco, Japan, United Arab Emirates, Israel, Yemen, Armenia, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Slovenia, Georgia, Maldives, Indonesia, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Spain, France, Bangladesh, Algeria, Burundi, Iraq, Colombia, Russian Federation, Mauritius, Malaysia, Pakistan, Cyprus, China and Viet Nam.

Speaking in right of reply at the end of the meeting were Argentina and Cuba.

The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Human Rights Council’s fifty-sixth regular session can be found here.

The Council will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Friday, 28 June to hold the first part of its annual full-day discussion on the human rights of women. The theme of the discussion will be economic violence as a form of gender-based violence against women and girls. At noon, it will continue the interactive dialogue with the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls.

Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Expert on Human Rights and International Solidarity

Report

The Council has before it the report of the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity on the participation of civil society organizations seeking to express international solidarity through transnational, international and regional networks (A/HRC/56/57).

Presentation of Report

CECILIA BAILLIET, Independent Expert on Human Rights and International Solidarity, said she was honoured to present her first report addressing the participation of civil society organizations seeking to express international solidarity through transnational, international, and regional networks. International solidarity was a meta right tied to freedom of expression and association as well as equality and non-discrimination. Civil society organizations were the engine of international solidarity and merited increased protection and support. Civil society actions included intersectoral solidarity approaches combining issues such as protection of the environment, access to fair housing, and women’s rights. These international solidarity coalitions challenged injustice and called for transformative changes within political and economic structures, seeking to empower the agency of vulnerable individuals and groups.

Ms. Bailliet acknowledged the resilience of civil society in the face of growing repression and the shrinking of the civic space, as confirmed by CIVICUS. The expansion of the use of censorship, disinformation, harassment, blacklisting, deportation, and denial of entry or exit visas under the guise of security was counterproductive as it actually increased the risk of violence. States were also increasingly applying these measures against the families and friends of solidarity activists. Ms. Bailliet called for the review of counter-terrorism legislation affecting international solidarity actors and their families. She recommended that the United Nations create a digital international solidarity platform to help end the digital divide and provide a safe space for civil society to exchange international solidarity ideas.

The Independent Expert then addressed the role of corporations in relation to international solidarity. One problem was that local elites sometimes partnered with transnational extractive companies to defeat inter-sectoral “infrastructure of care” solidarity movements led by indigenous, environmental, and women activists seeking to protect land, water and ecological areas. Ms. Bailliet recommended that international corporations created transparent mechanisms of presentation and response to solidarity claims by indigenous people, environmental activists, trade unions, and other actors. Negative global trends of polarisation, inequality, and fragmentation were impeding dialogue, cooperation, and peaceful dispute resolution. An example of this was the pre-emptive cancellation of solidarity student marches calling for peace in Gaza, and the arrest, suspension, expulsion and fining of university students.

Ms. Bailliet recommended that States support solidarity education initiatives to teach cooperation, inclusion, and mutual respect for diversity. There was an increased need to provide solidarity scholarships and visas for vulnerable students to study abroad. It was important to increase support for internal and international solidarity-oriented peace building initiatives that emancipated civil society, inclusive of fair participation by minorities, indigenous people, women, youth, and displaced communities. States should choose to pursue best practices of international solidarity policies, which would include showing clemency to opposing voices within societies, extending an olive branch to States across the regional groups, and creating bridging mechanisms for improved communication and dialogue.

International solidarity was a narrative of inclusion and recognition of diversity of civil society that could serve to promote social cohesion and sustainable development while also combatting inequality, polarisation, and fragmentation within and between nations. International solidarity should be mainstreamed within the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Summit of the Future, and there should be follow up of the recommendations in the report.

Ms. Bailliet encouraged States to expand solidarity measures to diminish inequality and marginalisation and continue to share their best solidarity policies. States should create new communication channels to facilitate peaceful dispute resolution and support social cohesion. Social solidarity governmental institutions should protect, rather than disempower, civil society organizations. Ms. Bailliet called upon States to collaborate to form a Group of Friends to Adopt the Revised Draft Declaration on Human Rights and International Solidarity to ensure a normative foundation to build constructive international solidarity projects within the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly and end the trend of polarisation.

Discussion

In the discussion, some speakers, among other things, welcomed the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity and congratulated her for the report. International solidarity was a fundamental principle of international law and was essential to address contemporary challenges such as extreme poverty, climate change and food insecurity.

International solidarity reflected mutual commitment to building a better world. Some speakers also emphasised the right to development and international solidarity as vital elements for all States to realise the promotion of the full enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights. All stakeholders should uphold the principles of international solidarity for improving the culture of cooperation and for the aim of promoting human rights worldwide. One speaker underscored the importance of international solidarity in the context of capacity building. Another called for increased international solidarity with those who were often marginalised and silenced, including indigenous peoples, migrants and internally displaced persons.

Some speakers emphasised the vital role of civil society organizations in strengthening international solidarity, as they worked to build bridges of cooperation and exchange knowledge and experiences between peoples and societies, enhancing efforts to achieve social and economic justice, confront common global challenges such as climate change, poverty, and human rights, and contribute to addressing them. Civil society organizations played a crucial role in expressing solidarity with the affected communities. They internationally advocated for the protection of civilians, respect of their human rights, and the prevention of further violence and displacement.

Some speakers said it was regrettable that the report failed to address the suffocation of international solidarity by the imposition of unilateral coercive measures. Unilateral coercive measures and their application as weapons of war were an act that violated and nullified international solidarity, and constituted a serious violation of all human rights, increasing poverty, discrimination and inequality. The Independent Expert was invited to consider the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures as limiting the exercise of international solidarity.

One speaker noted that the report had moved away from economic, social and cultural rights, particularly the right to development, by referring to human rights development. The mandate was not a demand from countries from the South but instead had followed the dictates of the North. Some speakers said that States should refrain from any action that could prejudice the human rights of individuals and peoples beyond their borders. It was essential to respect the national sovereignty of States and their exclusive responsibility for the implementation of human rights at the national level.

A speaker recommended that the Independent Expert distance herself from the internal affairs of countries that were protected by the right to sovereignty. It was imperative to clarify that international solidarity, as defined by international law, could not be distorted to justify interference in the internal affairs of other States for geopolitical interests. Such behaviour undermined the genuine spirit of solidarity that should transcend political biases. Some countries had continued to practice double standards and engage in confrontational actions to exert political pressure on certain countries, which was detrimental to human rights progress.

Concluding Remarks

CECILIA BAILLET, Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity, said her next report to the General Assembly would focus on artificial intelligence and international solidarity. Solidarity was a principle contained in many regional and domestic legal instruments. It helped to ensure that other legal instruments were inclusive. It was a meta right that was connected to several other rights. It was an enabling right that allowed civil society to stand up to repressive practices from States and companies.

The draft declaration on international solidarity promoted the multilateral system and multilateral actions. It defined how international solidarity allowed civil society to illuminate structural issues in society. It also showed how international solidarity helped to highlight corruption in financial systems. States could use the declaration to design solidarity practices to best suit their needs. Ms. Baillet closed by thanking speakers for their comments and support for the mandate.

Interactive Dialogue with the Working Group on Discrimination against Women and Girls

Reports

The Council has before it the reports of the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls on escalating backlash against gender equality and urgency of reaffirming substantive equality and the human rights of women and girls (A/HRC/56/51), its visit to Mauritania (A/HRC/56/51/Add.1), and its visit to Malta (A/HRC/56/51/Add.2).

Presentation of Reports

DOROTHY ESTRADA-TANCK, Chair of the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls, began her statement by expressing regret that the United Nations’ liquidity crisis had prevented the Working Group from making a planned official visit to Thailand.

She said that, despite advancements, no country in the world had achieved full gender equality. Women and girls continued to face discrimination in all spheres of their lives, frequently starting within their families and communities.

Six years ago, in 2018, the Working Group warned about the resurgence of a conservative and retrogressive narrative in international fora and at the national level, accompanied by attempts to reinstate policies or legislation that were harmful to women and girls, especially in the areas of family life and bodily autonomy. Today, the backlash against women’s and girls’ human rights was intensifying and had reached extreme proportions in certain countries. Retrogressive movements were jeopardising women’s and girls’ human rights, as well as the progress achieved in advancing gender equality in all regions of the world. The world was witnessing a growing backlash against sexual and reproductive health rights, including comprehensive education on sexual and reproductive health, ever-present misogynistic statements in the media, and the rise of anti-gender discourse in the public domain, as well as attacks on women and girl human rights defenders.

Afghanistan was an extreme example of gender backlash. The pattern of large-scale systematic violations of women’s and girls’ fundamental rights in Afghanistan by the discriminatory and misogynistic edicts, policies and harsh enforcement methods of the Taliban constituted an institutionalised framework of apartheid based on gender and merited an unequivocal response. The Working Group would keep on monitoring the situation in Afghanistan from a gender perspective to focus on counteracting the escalating gender backlash globally.

At the same time, as an overarching framework, the Working Group would develop an understanding of substantive equality for women and girls and the concrete implications that it held for States and other actors in the face of contemporary challenges. Substantive equality required committing to the transformation of elements of society, culture, politics and the economy that created barriers to equality. It required addressing discrimination in laws, policies and practices; redressing disadvantage; addressing stigma; providing reasonable accommodations for the particular needs of women and girls; combatting harmful stereotypes, prejudice and violence; adopting positive measures, when necessary; and making the structural changes necessary for women and girls to fully participate in all areas of life.

The next annual reports of the Working Group would focus on the gendered dimensions of the care and support system, gender equality in digital lives, and gender justice in post-conflict situations.

Ms. Estrada-Tanck said the realisation of substantive gender equality could not be further delayed. Humanity was in the midst of a backlash aimed at curtailing the equal enjoyment by women and girls of their rights in all major areas of life. Active resistance to gender equality was contributing to the slow progress and, in some cases, reversals of gains made in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. The status quo that failed to fulfil the human rights and fundamental freedoms of half of the world’s population was unacceptable. States needed to work together to build substantive gender equality. Other actors, such as those in the private sector, needed to support these efforts and respect and protect women’s and girls’ rights, especially those in the most marginalised and vulnerable conditions.

The report included recommendations to States to counter the gender backlash, eliminate discrimination against women and girls in the family, culture, the economy, politics, and sexual and reproductive health rights, and commit to achieving substantive gender equality. The Working Group highlighted the transformative force of millions of women and girls worldwide and of their movements and allies that strived to advance women’s and girls’ rights, resist pushbacks, and build just, inclusive, peaceful and sustainable societies for all. They were an inspiration and the main reason for hope and optimism for the future.

The Working Group visited Mauritania from 25 September to 6 October 2023. Mauritania had taken commendable steps towards gender equality by strengthening its institutional, political and legal framework. At the same time, the Working Group had observed that Mauritanian women faced barriers to meaningful participation in political decision-making and were severely underrepresented in the law enforcement, judicial and legal sectors. The gender gap in labour force participation in Mauritania remained stark, with only 26.4 per cent of women participating. Land and house ownership among Mauritanian women remained at extremely low levels.

Mauritania had made notable strides in enhancing access to education for women and girls, although much remained to be achieved. Despite some progress made, maternal mortality rates in Mauritania remained among the highest in the world. The Working Group was alarmed by the high rates of teenage pregnancy; child marriage which was permitted by law with minimal restrictions; forced marriage; and polygamy, which was also legal. The Working Group commended the prohibition by law of female genital mutilation. Nevertheless, the general prevalence of the practice remained very high.

The Working Group urged the Government to continue building momentum for the adoption of a comprehensive law on gender-based violence and to strengthen the draft law in line with international standards. Overall, Mauritania had much potential and needed to accelerate its efforts in realising it. The Working Group had identified additional challenges and formulated recommendations to assist the Government in the effort to eliminate discrimination against women and girls.

Ms. Estrada-Tanck said the Working Group visited Malta from 26 June to 7 July 2023. Malta had made significant strides in several aspects of gender equality, especially women’s economic participation, as well as educational attainment. The country had a comprehensive legal, policy and institutional framework for the protection and promotion of women’s and girls’ human rights. The Working Group congratulated Malta for its achievements as regional champion for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex rights. At the same time, Malta still faced considerable challenges, including deep-rooted gender stereotypes, the persistent underrepresentation of women in leadership positions, the need for improved work-life balance, the prevalence of violence against women, and the existence of a gender and pension pay gap.

While the Working Group welcomed the increased national dialogue about women’s and girls’ sexual and reproductive health rights observed at the time of the visit, it was deeply concerned that Malta continued to have the most restrictive abortion law in the European Union. Malta benefited from a vibrant civil society which needed to be further supported. The Working Group was concerned about the intimidating environment surrounding the debate on sexual and reproductive health rights as well as online and offline attacks against women activists and journalists. By challenging and transcending harmful traditional gender roles and expectations, Malta could unlock the potential of all persons and create a society where equality thrived.

The Working Group hoped that the findings and recommendations presented in its report would support the Government’s efforts towards gender equality. It looked forward to engaging with other Member States in the future and encouraged positive responses to its requests for visits.

Statements by Countries Concerned

Malta, speaking as a country concerned, said the country visit report was testament to Malta’s continued progress in the implementation of human rights standards. The report recognised Malta’s strengthening of policy frameworks, and achievements in women’s economic empowerment and equal education, among others. Malta was pleased the Working Group recognised the State’s commitment to combat gender-based violence in all instances. Malta clarified that there was one State-run shelter, and three shelters operated by two non-governmental organizations. There was no mention of services offered by non-governmental organizations in the report; Malta believed it was important to acknowledge the contributions of non-governmental organizations in domestic-based violence support and intervention.

The upcoming trafficking strategy was gender-sensitive in its approach and focused on a national referral mechanism for a centralised data collection system for victims of trafficking in human beings. The strategy also addressed the protection of migrant workers and allowed for a cross sectoral approach to combat human trafficking. The Working Group’s visit had reaffirmed Malta’s commitment to engaging with human rights mandates. The visit also provided authorities and civil society organizations with an opportunity to engage in an important debate to enhance the rights of women and girls and combat discrimination.

Mauritania, speaking as a country concerned, said it took note of recommendations expressed by the Working Group’s report. Mauritania was determined to work with all human rights mechanisms. Mauritania had ratified the basic international human rights treaties, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Maputo Protocol, in order to establish a legal framework that enabled protection and guaranteed the fight against discrimination against women.

Women’s participation in all spheres of life needed to be ensured. In Mauritania, women could access equal pay for equal work, and the same pensions and retirement rights as men. The State had also established shelters for women victims of violence. The State would finance programmes supporting women’s income generating activities. It had also launched the National Observatory for the Rights of Women and Girls, which received complaints about the abuse of women’s rights. The Government had further established a gender electoral list in Nouakchott. More women had been elected to office in all constituencies.

Mauritania had adopted several government programmes and mechanisms, including various awareness raising campaigns to integrate women and combat negative social and cultural practices against women. Mauritania attached importance to promoting women’s rights and combatting discrimination against them.

Discussion

In the discussion, some speakers, among other things, thanked the members of the Working Group for their crucial work and for their call within the Council that highlighted the intensifying backlash against women’s and girls’ rights. Speakers appreciated the emphasis of the Working Group on the necessity of recommitting to the universality of women’s and girls’ rights and its recognition of the intersectional identities of women and girls in achieving substantive equality.

Some speakers shared the concern of the Working Group at the “gender backlash” aimed at curtailing the equal enjoyment of all human rights by women and girls. This backlash was undermining achievements and prospects for further progress and had reached extremely worrying proportions in certain countries. Women and girls were continuously facing labour discrimination, a disproportionate share of unpaid care work, lack of sexual and reproductive health and rights, sidelining in peace processes, and harassment and violence, both offline and online, among others. Many women and girls experienced multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination. Even when legal and policy advancements were achieved, implementation gaps often remained.

A number of speakers echoed the Working Group’s highlighting of the transformative force of women, girls, and their movements and allies in resisting pushback. One speaker acknowledged the recommendation for international and regional organizations to uphold an integrated approach to advancing gender equality to counter backlash. Some speakers welcomed all recommendations within the report and stood ready to support States in their implementation to push forward for women’s and girl’s rights. There needed to be concerted efforts led by States, international organizations and religious organizations to counter discriminatory prejudices and stereotypes against women and girls, while charting a path towards the equal enjoyment of all their human rights.

A few speakers highlighted the facilitation of existing technology to perpetuate gender-based violence as being of particular concern. There was an urgent need to hold perpetrators of gender-based violence to account. In the digital world, it needed to be ensured that technology responded to the needs of women and girls and that gender stereotypes and discriminatory social norms would not be reinforced through biased digital platforms and algorithmic tools.

Many speakers outlined national commitments to countering the regression in gender equality, and to upholding the universal human rights of all women and girls. This included a reduction in the gender pay gap; strengthening the operations of shelters for victims of domestic violence; amplifying practices which pushed forward for gender equality; developments plans; prioritising women's affairs in politics; implementing legislation to protect gender-based violence; adopting a gender approach to recruitment; quotas for electoral positions; launching women entrepreneurial loan schemes; supporting feminist movements; and engaging men and boys.

Some speakers emphasised the situation in some countries and territories where women and girls were facing a systematic crackdown on their rights. One speaker expressed regret that the report contained contradictory wording and controversial concepts, including on the right to sexual and reproductive health, which was not a right within international law.

Speakers asked the Working Group questions, including: what was the most important factor for pursuing an intentionally gender-responsive approach in the design and implementation of digital technology, including the development of artificial intelligence? In the report, the Working Group highlighted the importance of the millions of women and girls worldwide who strove to advance gender equality, resist pushbacks and build just, inclusive, peaceful and sustainable societies for all. What could be done to support them and to ensure that men and boys became agents of change supporting an ambitious and transformative approach to address gender inequality? How could substantive gender equality be ensured, including regarding leadership positions at the United Nations?

Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the information media; not an official record.
English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.