Statement by Prof. Yakin Ertürk, Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences to the 61st session of the General Assembly

25 October, 2006

Mr. Chairperson, distinguished delegates, representatives of the United Nations and the NGO community,

It is with great pleasure that I address the 61st session of the General Assembly in my capacity as Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences.

During its current session the Assembly has reviewed the Secretary General’s report on violence against women. This report provides a basis for revisiting the gains and the remaining challenges with respect to enhancing rights of all women around the world. In this regard, I would like to emphasize once more the importance of strengthening and streamlining the existing policy and normative frameworks for the United Nations work on gender equality. The violence against women mandate of the HRC, CEDAW and CSW each offer a unique platform where significant progress has been achieved. Establishing stronger linkages between them can enhance the potential contributions of each mandate. Strengthening and reorganizing the UN the institutional framework for gender equality are also needed to better embrace the current challenges. I trust that the General Assembly will continue its leadership in making improvements in this direction, including by allocating sufficient resources.

Mr. Chairperson,

I’d like to express my gratitude for this opportunity to inform the General Assembly of the activities I have undertaken as Special Rapporteur on violence against women over the past year and also briefly discuss my upcoming missions and focus areas for the coming year.

I devoted my last thematic report to the Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/2006/61), which I also presented to the Human Rights Council, to the examination of the potentials of the due diligence standard as a tool for the effective implementation of human rights, including women’s right to a life free from violence. It is now a firmly established principle of international law that states have a duty to take positive action to prevent and protect women from violence, to punish perpetrators and to assure compensation for victims. Failure to fulfill this duty constitutes a breach of international law.

Conventionally, violence against women has been interpreted largely within a welfare/humanitarian paradigm. As a result, the application of the due diligence standard has tended to be limited to responding to violence when it occurs, i.e. protecting the victims and punishing the perpetuators. In this context, it has concentrated on the provision of services for victims of violence and legislative reform, including abolishing laws that discriminate against women. There has been relatively less systematic work done on the more general obligation of preventing violence from occurring in the first place, particularly by supporting women’s empowerment, and engaging in transformative change to eradicate patriarchal norms and values that underlie violence and subordinate women. On the other hand, due to the exclusively state-centric nature of the due diligence obligation and changing power dynamics, particularly those emanating from global restructuring, the challenges posed for state authorities as well as new questions they raise about the accountability of non-state actors have been largely overlooked.
From a human rights perspective, the current challenge in combating violence against women is ensuring that the root causes and consequences of the problem are tackled at all levels, from the home to the transnational arena. Applying a human rights perspective to the problem has inherently challenged the taken-for-granted aspects of everyday life. As a result, the focus has shifted from the earlier victimization-oriented approach to one of empowerment. The former saw women as weak, vulnerable and in need of protection; in the latter approach women are seen to be subjected to violence not because they are vulnerable, but because of a gender order that allows or legitimizes the use of violence. Women, individually and collectively, have always resisted and reacted to this order, and in the process have contributed to rupturing traditional patriarchy as well as breaking the silence around violence. Thus, today a life free of violence is accepted as an entitlement rather than merely a humanitarian concern. Identifying the rights bearer also brings with it a focus on the duty bearer with respect to responding to violence.
The multiplicity of forms of violence women encounter warrants a multifaceted strategy where alternative approaches supplement the human rights discourse. One such alternative approach is the empowerment discourse as engrained in the Beijing Platform for Action, which embraces the progressive realization of economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights, the fulfillment of which requires political will and an equitable and strategic allocation of limited resources.

Another effective approach is what I have called “cultural negotiation” which requires a state’s active engagement in the promotion and support of a public dialogue that aims to eradicate discriminatory values, norms and practices. This is particularly important as experience in human rights work has shown that efforts will go astray without community compliance and cooperation.

While the state is the primary duty bearer with respect to ensuring the human rights of each individual, in a globalized world where transnational space is expanding and non-state actors are gaining influence over diverse spheres, there is a need to broaden our understanding of the due diligence obligation beyond individual states . This may require new mechanisms and the adoption of legally binding, international codes of conduct for non-state actors with a transnational reach which some organizations are already initiating.

In responding to transnational challenges such as the trafficking of women or the regulation of migration and refugees the community of states needs to work together and develop innovative transnational strategies. Non-state entities with power and influence, including transnational corporations and international organizations, need to be held accountable when they fail to adhere to international standards

Mr. Chairperson,

In the course of 2006 I have conducted missions to Turkey, Sweden and the Netherlands. I am in the process of formulating my findings and recommendations and I look forward to reporting on these missions in 2007. At this time I would like to reiterate my appreciation of the support provided by the governments concerned in facilitating my work.

Today I would like to present an overview on the reports concerning my missions to the Russian Federation (E/CN.4/2006/61/Add.2), the Islamic Republic of Iran (E/CN.4/2006/61/Add.3), Mexico (E/CN.4/2006/61/Add.4) and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (E/CN.4/2006/61/Add.5). I would like to thank the governments of these countries for their cooperation with regard to my visits.

In the Russian Federation, which I visited from 17 to 24 December 2004, the political and economic transition has disproportionately burdened women. Furthermore, the revival of archaic notions of gender relations serves to justify gender inequality and widespread violence encountered by women. There are continuing reports of acts of violence against women in the Chechen Republic committed both by Chechen authorities and state agents. In a recently reported incident, a young Chechen woman, accused of being unfaithful with a Russian man, was detained by the Chechen authorities, tortured and ridiculed in public. This illustrates the extreme forms, which patriarchal control over women in both the public and private spheres of life can take. The Russian Federation has a historical legacy in the promotion of women’s rights and a well-developed state tradition which would enable it to effectively address violence against women if the government were to prioritize women’s rights. The creation, in June of this year, of an Inter-Ministerial Commission on the Promotion of Equality of Men and Women is a promising development in this direction.

From 29 January to 6 February 2005 I visited the Islamic Republic of Iran. Although the principle of equality is enshrined in the Constitution of Iran and women’s access to education is commendable, gender inequality is a salient feature of society which is upheld and perpetuated by patriarchal values and attitudes and state-promoted institutional structures based on gender-biased and hard-line interpretations of religious principles. Certain recent amendments to the law concerning child custody and the minimum age of marriage are promising steps towards the reinterpretation of fundamental principles in line with the current needs and societal contributions of women. However, these need to be followed by a comprehensive review and reform of discriminatory legal provisions in both the civil and penal codes that disempower women and aggravate their susceptibility to violence in the public and private spheres. Corporal punishments such as stoning and flogging must be outlawed and until then I have urged the authorities to uphold the moratorium on execution by stoning as the courts are continuing to sentence women to death by stoning. I was also disheartened by reports about an attempt to declare illegal the Defenders of Human Rights Center co-founded by Nobel Peace Prize winner Ms. Shirin Ebadi.

From 21-25 February 2005, I visited Mexico, where the high levels of violence against women are both a consequence and a symptom of widespread gender discrimination and inequality. Additional layers of discrimination on the basis of national origin, ethnicity or socio-economic status compound the issue for vulnerable groups of women - namely those who are migrants, poor and/or indigenous. The Government of Mexico is party to the major human rights treaties that provide women with protection against violence and has taken important steps to fulfill these obligations. However, it needs to take drastic measures to address the inadequate coordination between federal and state levels with regard to violence against women and make the police and justice sectors more responsive. Some states are lagging behind in their human rights responsibilities to protect women with due diligence. The problem has become particularly visible in the State of Chihuahua, where between 1993 and 2005 almost 400 women were murdered in Ciudad Juarez alone. Many perpetrators still enjoy impunity and the murders continue. The situation may be more worrisome along the southern border with Guatemala, where some 1,000 women were reported killed over a three year period. While both the state and the federal government have taken some commendable measures to solve past cases and prevent additional murders, many recommendations from international and national monitoring mechanisms have yet to be implemented.

From 9-19 July 2005 I visited the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Encouraging changes to the legal and institutional framework have occurred over the past four years, including the creation of the Constitution enshrining the principal of equal rights for men and women, the obligation for observance of international human rights norms and the reservation of a quota in the legislature for women. The Republic has ratified CEDAW without reservations and has created a Ministry of Women’s Affairs.

Yet severe violence against women in Afghanistan is all-pervasive. Murder in the name of honour, tradition and religion, forced and early marriages and domestic violence continue to sustain an environment of fear and insecurity for women. Factors that underlie the perpetuation of violence against women include the hard-line patriarchal gender order, the erosion of protective social mechanisms, a weak judiciary, a lack of law enforcement and widespread discriminatory practices combined with the prevailing poverty and insecurity in the country. A general sense of lawlessness and the rule of power, exercised with impunity, dominate everyday life.

Enhancing women’s status is not independent of the challenging but requisite transitions faced by Afghan society today such as the transition from conflict to peace; from a fragmented war economy to a sustained growth economy; from factional struggle to national reconciliation; and from rule of power to rule of law. Meanwhile, women and girls must be protected from violence as a matter of urgency, child and forced marriages must be stopped and safe houses for women and girls who have escaped from violence and have no other alternatives need to be provided. Safe houses are, no doubt, not a solution to the problem; however, the alternative may be abandoning women to a state of despair with fatal consequences.

Mr. Chairperson,

Regional consultations with NGOs have become an integral aspect of my work as Special Rapporteur. This year I attended a regional consultation in Ulaanbataar, Mongolia, which was organized by the Asia Pacific Women in Law and Development (APWLD). The Asia Pacific consultations have become institutionalized and offer a model for other regions. I encourage civil society actors to continue to organize and actively participate in such valuable and constructive initiatives.

The 2006 Consultation responded to the topic of my next thematic report to the Human Rights Council which will address the intersections of culture-based discourses and violence against women. In many parts of the world specific cultural practices, that compromise, if not totally sacrifice women’s rights, continue to prevail over universal cultural values coded into international human rights standards. Culture has become a site of power and politics, resulting in the imposition of dominant interpretations to restrict women’s lives and to justify and excuse acts of discrimination and violence against women, thus undermining state compliance with international human rights obligations.

Culture evolves as a response to different and competing individual and collective needs and aspirations, which makes culture diverse and dynamic. However, at any given time, dominant interpretations of culture may be legitimized and imposed on a society or a community. The assertions of dominant interpretations of culture, in seemingly diverse socio-cultural settings, are often similar to the extent that they (i) presuppose a static and homogenous set of values and norms that govern the lives of a collective entity; (ii) reflect and reinforce hegemonic and patriarchal power relations. Such cultural discourses are at odds with universal cultural standards.

The challenge that confronts us today is to respect and prize our diverse cultures while developing common strategies to resist oppressive practices in the name of culture and to promote and uphold universal human rights norms while rejecting ethnocentric encroachments. In short, in our efforts to ensure the universal human rights of women in all parts of the world we must stand firm against both occidental and oriental myths and impositions.

This year I had scheduled a mission to Algeria, which was to take place in January 2006. Unfortunately, it was postponed on short notice at the request of the Government. However, I would like to note that I have received assurances from the government that the mission can take place in early 2007.

In addition, I have renewed my request to visit to the Democratic Republic of Congo and have also requested to carry out official missions to Ghana and Saudi Arabia in 2007. Finally, I have taken up an invitation from the Government of Zimbabwe which has, upon its own initiative, invited me to carry out an official mission.

Mr. Chairperson,

On behalf of all of the women whose lives have been improved by the important steps taken by the international community of states, I thank you. On behalf of all the women who continue to suffer from violence and discrimination, I urge states to continue to work together towards the full realization of universal human rights of all women around the globe.

Thank you for your attention.