Countering incitement, recruitment and violent extremism conducive to terrorism

Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today on the human rights aspects of countering incitement, recruitment and extremism.

It is now broadly accepted that when counter-terrorism does not respect human rights it leads not only to violations but can also undermine the goals of counter-terrorism itself. This has been clearly and repeatedly stated by the SG, and his two predecessors.

The challenge is complex. For instance, governments in all regions, and the UN itself, have struggled to find the line between, on the one hand, calling for an end to incitement and on the other protecting the right to freedom of expression. And yet, if the challenge is not carefully managed it leads to very serious consequences for counter-terrorism, for human rights, and even for development.

• Concern over the risks of terrorism lead governments to justify arbitrary arrests, for example of religious or intellectual leaders in a community. These arrests are often used by extremists to claim that the only effective way to protect the community is terrorism. 
  
• Even when counter-terrorism actions to end incitement and recruitment are fully compliant with human rights, they are sometimes still described by extremist entities as an abuse of power and used as the basis for further incitement and recruitment. 
  
• In addition to the operational challenges of countering terrorism, governments must manage domestic political pressures which may not be aligned with human rights standards. 
  

We get all that, but there is no easy response. But, finding the right way forward goes to the core of successful counter-terrorism actions. OHCHR urges Member States to support four strategies.

First, we recommend that governments put in place systems for a human rights operational review of policies, legislation and specific operational actions to counter incitement, recruitment and extremism. Such reviews would provide a systematic check on potentially harmful practices by State actors and serve an invaluable prevention function.

OHCHR stands ready to support such systems. For instance, we have recently published a document providing concrete guidance to States on “Human Rights-Compliant Responses to the Threat Posed by Foreign Fighters” (per Security Council resolutions 2178 and 2396). including a section on violent extremism and incitement. More broadly, OHCHR is always available to provide technical support upon request. For instance, we can advise on when draft legislation makes overly vague references to ‘extremism’ that can lead to abuses. Similarly, we can advise on when the blocking or removal of specific content online may violate rights and lead to more extremism.

Second – recognizing that even where counter-terrorism efforts fully respect human rights, extremists will still claim that the efforts are abusive and will use them for further incitement and recruitment – OHCHR urges that governments proactively adopt broad human rights strategies for those communities affected by counter-terrorism.

For instance, human rights strategies for affected communities that focus on priority economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights will undercut extremists’ efforts to claim that State counter-terrorism is an abuse against the community. Reinforced efforts to support the rights to education, to work, to non-discrimination, and to identity, to mention just a few, will give populations increased confidence in the State and weaken the arguments of terrorist recruiters. There are many advantages to this approach; among others, it will help national authorities identify vulnerable populations in these contexts such as women, children and religious minorities and take action to protect them from terrorism and counter-terrorism.

Here too, OHCHR can offer support, including translating recommendations from the Universal Periodic Review into actions that can be quickly and visibly implemented.

Third, much has been said by Member States and the Secretariat about the harmful effects of silos in UN action, and the beneficial effects of more interlinked efforts. For instance, the inclusion of an operational human rights approach in implementation of the SDGs provides many of the elements needed for successful counter-terrorist strategies that protect human rights. Strong operational links between UN human rights mechanisms, OHCHR, and national SDG implementation would be a tremendous asset for national counter-terrorism. The challenge here is promoting a coherent approach across the UN system and ensuring that UN efforts are focused on providing Member States with the support they need. OHCHR stands ready to work on this as part of our prevention strategy.

Fourth, civil society can be and should be a key partner in State efforts to combat violent extremism and terrorism. The Madrid Guiding Principles note that the ability of non-governmental actors to operate in a secure environment and fully respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms should be safeguarded. There are many reasons why civil society can be helpful in counter-terrorism efforts. Indeed, they can help States address some of the very conditions that are most conducive to terrorism, including the lack of development, disenfranchisment of marginalised groups of society, and human rights violations, as mentioned before. However, they can also be reliable implementing partners for States in counter-terrorism related assistance. Civil society – if given the room to do so - can thus play a crucial role in helping States to tackle violent extremism conducive to terrorism.

However, since 11 September 2001, terrorism and the reaction to it by many governments has had an increasing impact on civil society. All too often we are seeing tough laws being passed in countries restricting activities of civil society. Civil society activists are increasingly being labelled as terrorists, when in fact all they were doing was simply expressing views not consistent with those of their Governments. It is therefore important to adopt legislation protecting the space afforded to civil society, not to shrink it still further.

In conclusion, these are 4 areas which we believe could have a significant impact on preventing violent extremism and countering terrorism. OHCHR hopes that Member States may find our proposals useful in the context of the review of the Madrid Guiding Principles.