Accessibility Tools

Select your language

UN Updates

Our strategic presence in Geneva sets us apart as the sole NGO exclusively committed to economic, social, cultural, and environmental rights. This permits us to play a pivotal role in promoting and protecting these rights globally.
GI-ESCR was re-elected
Featured

GI-ESCR was re-elected

GI-ESCR re-elected to the Steering Committee of the Extra-Territorial Obligations Consortium

 

The Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (GI-ESCR) was re-elected by its peers to continue serving on the Steering Committee of the Extra-Territorial Obligations Consortium.  The GI-ESCR is pleased to continue working with its colleagues and partners who also serve on the Steering Committee and looks forward to contributing further to guiding the ETO Consortium in the coming years, including advancing the ETO agenda at the Vienna +20 World Conference on Human Rights.

The ETO Consortium is a network of leading human rights organizations, university institutes, civil society organizations and institution-based individuals.  Its purpose is to address the current shortcomings of human rights interpretation in a globalization context by mainstreaming states’ extraterritorial obligations.

The Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has been a member of the ETO Consortium since the GI-ESCR’s founding and provides expertise to the Consortium’s International Financial Institution and Development Cooperation Focal Group as well as on strategic litigation.

For more information on the work of the GI-ESCR in this area see HERE.

For detailed information on Extra-Territorial Obligations and human rights see:

Maastricht Principles on Extra-Territorial Obligations and the Commentary to the Maastricht Principles on Extra-Territorial Obligations

Also see the FIAN flyer on ETOs HERE.

GI-ESCR Comments Regarding UN High Level Panel Report
Featured

GI-ESCR Comments Regarding UN High Level Panel Report

GI-ESCR Comments Regarding UN High Level Panel Report on Post-2015 Development Framework

 

The Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (GI-ESCR) welcomes some positive aspects of the UN High Level Report entitled A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies Through Sustainable Development, but is concerned that the report fails to fully place international human rights at the core of the post-2015 development agenda.  Human rights standards, including economic, social and cultural rights standards, are clearly defined and should be used as the foundation and means of implementation of any forthcoming development framework.

The Report, which addresses the post-2015 global development framework, acknowledged that the MDGs fell short by not integrating the economic, social, and environmental aspects of sustainable development as envisaged in the Millennium Declaration, and by not addressing the need to promote sustainable patterns of consumption and production.

According to Bret Thiele, Co-Executive Director of the GI-ESCR, "while we had hoped that the report would go further at challenging the current economic paradigm, the report does acknowledge inequalities and the need to ensure that participatory processes guide development." He added that "the recognition of environmental protection, including the challenge of climate change, as linked to human development marks a positive shift from the MDG framework yet human rights are treated more as rhetoric than as a core framework by which to guide, implement and monitor development."

Mayra Gomez, Co-Executive Director of the GI-ESCR, pointed out that the "inclusion of the gender dimensions of land rights is critical to ensuring women’s empowerment and sustainable development in the future. We know that women’s land rights have a profoundly transformative impact in terms of fostering gender equality, increasing food and nutritional security, and improving environmental sustainability. It was promising to see that the High Level Panel’s report included suggested Target 1b, which in part seeks to increase the share of women with secure rights to land and property.”

While the Report is a positive development, and clearly states that the next development framework must be based on human rights, advocates must build upon these pronouncements and continue to ensure that the full spectrum of civil, cultural, economic, political and social human rights are at the core of any post-2015 development framework. Such advocacy is crucial to ensure that human rights move from rhetoric to reality.

 The full Report can be accessed HERE.

 

You don't have a pdf plugin, but you can download the pdf file.

Global Initiative for ESCR - Annual Report 2012
Featured

Global Initiative for ESCR - Annual Report 2012

Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights - Annual Report 2012

 

Annual Report 2012

Message from the Co-Executive Directors

Advocates for economic, social and cultural human rights (ESC rights) have a lot to be proud of.  More than any other area of human rights, these rights have advanced markedly over the past two decades. International human rights bodies are increasingly developing the content of these rights; legal advocates and social activists are working diligently to enforce these rights at national as well as international levels; and some of the largest and most influential human rights organizations in the world – organizations like Amnesty International which used to be solely focused on protecting civil and political rights – have begun to embrace the ‘full spectrum of human rights,’ recognizing that violations of ESC rights represent some of the worst human rights crises of our time. These have all been substantial transformations which have moved ESC rights from the margins toward the fore of the human rights movement.

Yet, despite these advances, the reality for billions of people around the world is a continuing and systematic lack of access to basic rights, with devastating consequences day in and day out for the world’s poor. The truth is that all of us today live in an era of unprecedented inequality, and of unprecedented levels of global poverty. Sadly, there remains a stark chasm between the standards which exist protecting ESC rights, and their actual enjoyment on the ground.

In order to find solutions aimed at closing the gap and to discuss unmet needs in the field, in late 2011 the GI-ESCR convened a small brain trust of experts, advocates and leaders working across the human rights, development, women’s rights and the environmental justice sector. This strategy meeting allowed us to think collectively about some of the most pressing challenges facing the global movement for ESC rights, as well as how the GI-ESCR as a new organization seeking to engage in new ways, can work in concert with our partners to help overcome those challenges. The activities carried out over the course of 2012, and reported here, reflect those discussions and have continued to deepen collaborations with our partners.

The meeting identified critical tasks for the ESC Rights movement, including: (1) building and deepening cross-sector alliances (particularly with respect to the development, women’s rights, and the environmental sectors); (2) ensuring that poor and marginalized communities are well equipped with knowledge of their rights, and well positioned to claim them; (3) developing and sharing tools which demonstrate how ESC rights can be respected, protected and fulfilled in practice; and (4) braving new frontiers in standard-setting and enforcement.  These are the threads that bind together our advocacy, and which set the stage for our achievements in 2012.

With these broader tasks in mind, in 2012 the GI-ESCR embarked upon its first full year of operations, and we are proud to say that we have achieved significant outcomes from our work – outcomes we see laying the foundation for transformative impact on the ground. These outcomes were realized across all three of our strategic priorities – namely strategic litigation and legal advocacy; advancing women’s and ESC rights; and human rights and development. While details of this work are listed below under the respective strategic priorities, there is overlap as the GI-ESCR strives for work at the intersection of these priorities. The GI-ESCR also works to incorporate advocacy in the area of environmental rights within all three priorities, particularly when the environment has an impact on human dignity.

Results in the area of strategic litigation include the first ever recognition by the UN Human Rights Committee of extra-territorial obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as well as the issuance of the first ever permanent injunction under the ICCPR preventing a threatened forced eviction and the first ever order for positive obligations related to connection of water services. These achievements have changed the landscape of ESC rights protection at the international level by using the principle of indivisibility of all human rights. These results are part of our continued efforts to ensure that those that violate housing rights – as well as the rights related to access to water and sanitation –are held accountable by the UN Human Rights Committee as violations under ICCPR. These successes before the UN Human Rights Committee have ensured that the principle of indivisibility of rights has real meaning and has expanded avenues for social rights enforcement under the ICCPR. A range of human rights advocates have already begun to use this expanded space for human rights accountability and remedies in their own respective advocacy, and we are proud to have helped pave the way.

In the area of women’s ESC rights, the GI-ESCR has played a vital role in the advancement of women’s land, housing and property rights at both international and regional levels. We believe that these rights are fundamental to improving women’s lives and to ensuring gender equality, and they cut across many of the sectors we seek to engage through the GI-ESCR. Here, we have sought to create and strengthen a coherent set of progressive norms and standards which can be used by advocates to orchestrate change on behalf of women’s rights to housing, land and other productive resources at various levels. In 2012, the GI-ESCR convened various panel discussions and strategic meetings on these issues, and engaged extensively with the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and UN-Women on these issues, including by preparing a background paper on women’s land rights for an Expert Group Meeting convened in 2012 by these two agencies which serves as the basis of a forthcoming UN Handbook. The GI-ESCR also stepped up advocacy efforts with the UN Human Rights Committee and the UN Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW Committee) on these issues, including by facilitating access for grassroots women, with very positive results and strong Concluding Observations from both Committees on women’s right related to housing, land and other productive resources.

In the area of human rights and development, we have continued to advocate for a post-2015 development paradigm that fully incorporates the human rights framework, and ESC rights in particular. For instance, working with the Landesa Center for Women’s Land Rights, the GI-ESCR contributed to consultations around the post-2015 Millennium Development Goal agenda through publication of a paper on women and land rights. The paper pointed out that just as “discrimination against women and girls impairs progress in all other areas of development,” gender inequality in secure rights to land and property impedes progress in achieving inclusive economic and social development, environmental sustainability, and peace and security – dimensions the UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda identified as requiring progress to build an equitable, secure, and sustainable world. The GI-ESCR also produced the first of its Briefing Papers on the human rights-based approach to development in the areas of water, participation, land, women migrant workers, and family planning. These papers not only discuss the rights-based approach with respect to these areas, but offer real world examples of how governments and other actors can best implement development plans within the human rights framework and the value of doing so.

Lastly, during 2012, the GI-ESCR also continued to carry forward the housing rights expertise that formally was housed at the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE). Work related to housing rights included drafting a paper on the legal and jurisprudential aspects of security of tenure for the Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, participating in an Expert Group Meeting on security of tenure convened by the Special Rapporteur, moderating the Gender Assembly at UN Habitat’s Sixth World Urban Forum, participating at the Gender Round Table at the World Urban Forum, and participating at the African Union – European Union Civil Society Human Rights Seminar. The GI-ESCR has also continued with the ongoing strategic litigation for which COHRE had been responsible, including cases before the UN Human Rights Committee and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

We are also happy to report that we have ended the 2012 fiscal year on a sound financial footing which lays the foundation for organizational growth in 2013 and beyond. We look forward to the GI-ESCR’s continued work and engagement with our partners worldwide to ensure that all of the gains we have achieve so far continue to move us toward the transformative impact we seek.

Mayra Gomez and Bret Thiele

Co-Executive Directors

GI–ESCR

Access a full copy of the Annual Report here.

Human Rights must be at the core of post-2015 Development Framework
Featured

Human Rights must be at the core of post-2015 Development Framework

Human Rights must be at the core of post-2015 Development Framework

 

Twenty-one leading human rights organizations call for human rights to be at the core of a post-2015 development framework.  

Joint Statement:  Human Rights for All Post-2015

May 2013

Human rights have surged to the forefront of the debate about what will succeed the Millennium Development Goals in 2015. As human rights and social justice organizations worldwide, we feel compelled to lay out some of the baseline implications of embedding human rights into the core of the sustainable development agenda this time around.

At its essence, a post-2015 framework anchored in human rights moves from a model of charity to one of justice, based on the inherent dignity of people as human rights-holders, domestic governments as primary duty-bearers, and all development actors sharing common but differentiated responsibilities. Accordingly, the post-2015 framework should be designed as a tool to empower and enable people—individually and collectively—to monitor and hold their governments, other governments, businesses, international institutions and other development actors to account for their conduct as it affects people’s lives within and beyond borders. A sustainable development framework founded in human rights can serve as an instrument for people and countries to help unseat the structural obstacles to sustainable, inclusive and just development, and stimulate implementation and enforcement of all human rights—civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, the right to development and to environmental protection.

The post-2015 framework must then at the very least respect and reflect pre-existing human rights legal norms, standards and political commitments to which governments have already voluntarily agreed. International human rights, environmental and humanitarian law, the Millennium Declaration, as well as related international consensus documents agreed in Rio, Vienna, Cairo, Beijing, Monterrey and Copenhagen and their follow-up agreements must form its non-negotiable normative base.

If it is going to incentivize progress while also preventing backsliding and violations, human rights principles and standards must go beyond the rhetorical, and have real operational significance this time around. Amongst other things, anchoring the post-2015 agenda in human rights for current and future generations implies that the framework:

1. Upholds all human rights for all.The framework should stimulate improved human rights process and outcomes for all people, especially the most vulnerable, in all countries global North and global South. Along with economic, social, cultural and environmental rights, any successor framework must include commitments to protect freedom of association, expression, assembly and political participation if it is to ensure an enabling environment for an empowered civil society, and protect human rights defenders, including women human rights defenders, as central agents translating international political commitments into lived realities.

2. Stimulates transparency and genuine participation in decision-makingat all levels, throughout all policies including budget, financial, and tax policies. Access to information and consequential participation is not only a fundamental human right, but will also be critical to developing, implementing, and monitoring an effective and responsive post-2015 framework.

3. Integrates meaningful institutions and systems to ensure human rights accountability of all development actors. Lofty aspirations for a post-2015 agenda will surely fail if proper citizen-led systems of monitoring and human rights accountability are not built into the very DNA of the framework, with clear and time-bound commitments of all relevant actors. While states must remain the primary duty-holder in development, all development actors, including third-party states, the private sector and international institutions should be made responsive and accountable for achieving and not undermining global goals. Integrating substantive human rights criteria into assessments of progress towards development goals and commitments means monitoring both the policy and budgetary efforts of governments alongside development outcomes. Any post-2015 monitoring mechanism would benefit from constructive interaction with the existing human rights protection regime, as well as other relevant accountability mechanisms. National mechanisms, such as judiciaries, parliaments, national human rights institutions, reinforced by regional and international human rights mechanisms such as the treaty bodies and the Universal Peer Review mechanism, can help ensure the implementation of the post-2015 commitments. Likewise, the post-2015 development agenda is well-placed to encourage governments to improve access to justice for people living currently in poverty by monitoring measures to eradicate existing barriers.

4. Ensures that the private sector, at the very least, does no harm. The post-2015 framework must reflect current international consensus that governments have a duty to protect human rights through the proper oversight and regulation of private actors, especially business and private financial actors to guarantee in practice that they respect human rights and the environment, including in their cross-border activities. At the very least, no governments should allow their territory to be used for illegal or criminal activities elsewhere, such as tax evasion, environmental crimes or involvement in human rights violations, no matter the perpetrator.

5. Eliminates all forms of discrimination and diminishes inequalities, including socioeconomic inequalities must be priorities. To start, the timely collection and disaggregation of data on the basis of various grounds of compound discrimination is essential to identify, make visible and respond to inequalities and violations of human rights and to increase accountability. At a national level, data should be collected and disaggregated based on country-relevant factors as defined by rights-holders. Governments have a particular obligation under human rights law to protect the rights of the most marginalized and excluded and to take additional measures to ensure that they enjoy their rights on an equal basis with others. Protecting decent work, and diminishing wage disparities is also fundamental to reducing socio-economic inequality, as is reforming tax policy nationally and globally to unleash the resources necessary to finance human rights fulfillment.

6. Specifically and comprehensively supports women's rights. Addressing gender-based violence, guaranteeing sexual and reproductive rights, ensuring women’s rights to and control over land, property and productive resources and their economic independence, recognizing the care economy and ensuring women’s rights to social protection and the equal distribution of paid and unpaid work, and their rights to participation in decision-making are critical, not only to realize women's human rights and achieve gender equality, but for enabling women’s full and active participation in economic, political and social life.

7. Enable the currently disadvantaged and commonly discriminated against and excluded groups to be effective agents of their own developmentby drawing on the provisions of human rights standards aimed at eliminating discrimination on grounds such as race, disability, migrant or indigenous status, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc.

8. Upholds the legal obligation to fulfill the minimum essential levels of economic, social, and cultural rights, without retrogression, which would imply a focus on “getting to zero”through the provision of social protection floors, universal health coverage, food security, and other floors below which no one anywhere will be allowed to live.

9. Tackles structural drivers of inequality, poverty and ecological devastation at the global level. A genuine and balanced global partnership then would enable people and institutions to monitor the common but differentiated responsibilities of all actors to prohibit rather than perpetuate these global obstacles. To be good-faith partners then, governments, business and international institutions must assess the impact of their policies (e.g. corporate accountability, environment, trade, aid, tax, migration, intellectual property, debt, monetary, financial regulation) on human rights outside of their borders. Existing human rights norms can provide a common set of standards and useful yardstick to assess policy coherence for sustainable development.

At a time of great uncertainty, multiple crises and increasing insecurity and conflict, let us not found the 21st century sustainable development framework on 'bracketed rights’ and broken promises, but instead on a bold reaffirmation of human rights for all.

PDF version of the Joint Statement can be found HERE.

 

You don't have a pdf plugin, but you can download the pdf file.

 

Signatories so far include: 1.    Amnesty International 2.    Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND) 3.    Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID) 4.    Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) 5.    Center for Women’s Global Leadership at Rutgers University (CWGL) 6.    Center of Concern 7.    Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights (ECESR) 8.    Equilibres & Populations (EquiPop), France 9.    European NGOs for Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights, Population and Development (EuroNGOs) 10.    Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 11.    International Centre of Comparative Environmental Law, or Centre International de Droit Comparé de l'Environnement (CIDCE), France 12.    International Women's Health Coalition (IWHC), USA 13.    Kepa, Finland 14.    KULU-Women and Development 15.    LDC Watch International 16.    National Indigenous Women Federation (NIWF), Nepal 17.    Realizing Sexual and Reproductive Justice (RESURJ) 18.    Social Watch 19.    Southern Africa Human Rights NGO Network (SAHRINGON), Tanzania Chapter 20.    Terre des hommes Germany 21.    WASH United,  Germany

A first draft of this statement was prepared by the Securing Human Rights for All work session of the Advancing the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda global civil society conference in Bonn, Germany (March 2013). The statement is being circulated for endorsement by interested organizations. To get involved, please email Niko Lusiani, CESR at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Individual Complaint Mechanism for Violations of ESCR Enters Into Force
Featured

Individual Complaint Mechanism for Violations of ESCR Enters Into Force

Individual Complaint Mechanism for Violations of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Enters Into Force

 

5 May 2013 The Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (GI-ESCR) welcomes the entry into force of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. With this Optional Protocol, rights holders have an important international mechanism to hold actors accountable to their human rights obligations.

The Optional Protocol creates mechanisms for Individual Complaints as well as State to State complaints and Inquiries initiated by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights regarding obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

With the Optional Protocol, the international community comes much closer to treating “human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same emphasis” as required by the Vienna Declaration on Human Rights.

The Individual Complaint procedure provides an opportunity for everyone, including those living in poverty and other marginalized groups, to hold States accountable for respecting, protecting and fulfilling economic, social and cultural rights, including the human rights to adequate housing, food, water, sanitation, health care, education and social security. This procedure will also provide further clarity on the content on human rights, resulting in greater guidance for governments that seek to implement the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in good faith.

The Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is a member of the ESCR-Net Working Group on Adjudication and its Strategic Litigation Initiative (SLI). The SLI will work with human rights advocates to build capacity to use these new human rights enforcement mechanisms to their fullest, including working to ensure that resulting jurisprudence is informed by the voices of marginalized individuals, groups and communities and reflects progressive human rights ideals.

For more information on the Optional Protocol, and how to get involved with further advocacy around the Optional Protocol, see HERE.

Human Rights Committee set to scrutinize the US
Featured

Human Rights Committee set to scrutinize the US

Human Rights Committee set to scrutinize the United States regarding extra-territorial human rights obligations

 

The Human Rights Committee, which monitors compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), is set to scrutinize the United States regarding its extra-territorial human rights obligations under the Covenant. The U.S. will appear before the Committee in March 2014 for its periodic review. The Committee has made clear that the ICCPR includes extra-territorial obligations to respect and to ensure human rights, including by regulating and otherwise holding corporations accountable to those obligations for their activities abroad.

The Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (GI-ESCR) successfully intervened with a Parallel Report laying out the extra-territorial obligations under the ICCPR and requesting that the Committee include scrutiny on those obligations within the periodic review of the U.S.

The List of Issues recently adopted by the Committee, which defines the scope of review, requires the U.S. to discuss its understanding of the "the scope of applicability of the Covenant with respect to individuals under its jurisdiction but outside its territory; in times of peace, as well as in times of  armed conflict".  As the Parallel Report makes clear, the jurisprudence of the Committee provides a clear articulation of the extra-territorial application of ICCPR obligations.  Notwithstanding, the U.S. continues to states that the ICCPR only applies within U.S. territory.

The Global Initiative's Parallel Report for the periodic review also calls on the Committee to hold the U.S. accountable for extra-territorial obligations in the context of decisions made within international financial institutions such as the World Bank.

This examination of the U.S. provides advocates the opportunity to address the issue of extra-territorial obligations and provides the Committee the opportunity to finally settle this misinterpretation by the U.S. of its treaty obligations.

 

The GI-ESCR's Parallel Report regarding the List of Issues can be found HERE.

The List of Issues can be found HERE.

The GI-ESCR's Parallel Report on the legal analysis for the periodic review can be found HERE.

The Joint GI-ESCR/International Human Rights Clinic at Western New England University School of Law factual Parallel Reports can be found HERE and HERE.

 

You don't have a pdf plugin, but you can download the pdf file.

 

You don't have a pdf plugin, but you can download the pdf file.

 

You don't have a pdf plugin, but you can download the pdf file.

 

You don't have a pdf plugin, but you can download the pdf file.

NEWS: Extra-Territorial Obligation to Protect Human Rights
Featured

NEWS: Extra-Territorial Obligation to Protect Human Rights

NEWS: Extra-Territorial Obligation to Protect Human Rights

 

Media attention in Canada related to the Individual Complaint filed before the Human Rights Committee against Canada for violating extra-territorial obligations related to construction of settlements in Palestine by Canadian corporations:

Palestinians to UN: Canadian Businesses Profit in Settlements

BIL’IN, West Bank — In a move that could greatly impact the actions of third-party states and companies currently profiting from Israel’s illegal settlement enterprise in the West Bank, the Palestinian village of Bil’in recently filed a complaint against Canada with the United Nations.

Residents allege that Canada failed to prevent two Canadian companies — Greenpark International and Greenmount International — from constructing and profiting from settler houses built on their land in the Israeli settlement of Modi’in Illit.

“They don’t respect the international law when they [are] coming and building settlements with illegal methods in our lands,” explained Abdallah Abu Rahmah, an activist and member of the Bil’in Popular Committee.

Bil’in presented its case on March 18 to the UN Human Rights Committee, a body of judicial experts that monitors states’ implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The petition argues that Canada “violated its extra-territorial obligation to ensure respect” for five separate articles of the ICCPR.

This isn’t the first time that Bil’in residents sued the two Canadian-registered corporations. Residents took their case to the Quebec Superior Court in Montreal in 2008, accusing the companies of “aiding and abetting the commission of a war crime.”

The Quebec court ruled against the villagers’ petition, however, deciding that Canada didn’t have jurisdiction over the matter, and that the complaint should be heard in Israel instead.

“But we know about the situation in Israel. The courts and the system support building settlements,” Abu Rahmah told Al-Monitor. He said that the lack of justice in Israeli and Canadian courts pushed Bil’in to seek accountability at the UN.

Ending impunity

Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, an occupying power may not transfer its civilian population to the territory it occupies, and that doing so constitutes a war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy also stipulates that companies — and the countries where these companies are registered — should ensure they respect international law standards in their work, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international conventions.

“This is a new approach to human rights enforcement in international law,” explained Israeli attorney Michael Sfard, who is representing the villagers of Bil’in in their complaint. “The idea is that the states’ obligations do not end in avoiding directly violating human rights, but also that they have to regulate the activity of nationals and corporations when those are acting abroad.”

Sfard told Al-Monitor that Canada has six months from the date the complaint was submitted (March 18) to respond. The UN Committee is then expected to make a decision.

“If [the committee decides] that Canada was wrong, then I hope that they will also indicate what are the remedies that Canada has to secure,” he added.

“Canada has post-facto not provided remedy for the victims of these abuses. After our long attempt to get remedy in Canadian courts, which was denied … the Canadian courts have sent us [back] to Israeli courts. Israeli courts are fundamentally not appropriate because in Israel, Israeli courts have concluded that the issue of settlements is not a matter for the courts to [decide].”

Decades of Israeli land confiscation

The Palestinian village of Bil’in — located only 12 kilometers from Ramallah, in the occupied West Bank — counts approximately 1,800 residents. Since 2005, villagers have held weekly demonstrations every Friday to denounce the Israeli separation wall that cuts through their land, and Israel’s continued settlement expansion and occupation.

The Jewish-only settlement of Modi’in Illit, which now holds more than 46,000 residents, was built on land that Israel confiscated from the village, while construction of Israel’s separation wall cut Bil’in off from over half of its land.

In 2007, the Israeli Supreme Court ordered the state to dismantle and rebuild a section of the wall that runs through Bil’in. The ruling was finally implemented in 2011, when 25% of the land was returned to local residents.

There are currently 520,000 Jewish-Israeli settlers living in the occupied West Bank, including 200,000 in east Jerusalem. Over the past decade, the Israeli settler population has grown at a rate of 5.3% annually, compared to only 1.8% growth inside Israel proper.

“They are making our life very difficult. They confiscated our land. They don’t allow us to work on it,” said Abdallah Abu Rahmah, explaining that the Israeli authorities grant residents access to large areas of their agricultural land only once a year.

“Our protest is to remove the settlements on our land, and destroy the wall on our land. Secondly, Bil’in was a model in all of the world in using non-violent resistance and for this, we will continue our struggle until we remove the occupation from our land.”

Setting a precedent

A recent UN-appointed fact-finding mission to assess the impact of Israeli settlements on Palestinians stated that countries must ensure that businesses domiciled under their jurisdiction that work in or in relation to Israeli settlements respect basic Palestinian human rights.

“Private companies must assess the human rights impact of their activities and take all necessary steps — including by terminating their business interests in the settlements — to ensure they are not adversely impacting the human rights of the Palestinian People,” it found.

Since Palestine received upgraded, non-member observer standing at the UN last year, many local groups have urged the Palestinian Authority (PA) to hold Israel accountable at the ICC for alleged war crimes.

While the PA has publicly threatened to go to the ICC, it recently announced that it would suspend efforts to use UN mechanisms to give US-led peace talks a chance to get off the ground. American Secretary of State John Kerry met separately with PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier this week.

According to attorney Michael Sfard, Bil’in’s complaint to the UN could not only set an important precedent for Palestinians, but change the conduct of all corporations doing business outside of their national borders.

“If we are successful in this complaint, that means that we will secure a very mighty tool,” Sfard said. “That means that states will have to … regulate companies’ conduct extraterritorially. That would be a huge, huge development in international human rights law.”

Jillian Kestler-D'Amours is a Canadian journalist and documentary filmmaker based in Jerusalem. She is a regular contributor to Inter Press Service news agency, Al Jazeera English and Free Speech Radio News. Follow her on Twitter: @jilldamours.

 

You don't have a pdf plugin, but you can download the pdf file.

Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing releases
Featured

Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing releases

Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing releases report on security of tenure

 

The UN Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, Raquel Rolnik, presented her new thematic report to the UN Human Rights Council on 4 March 2012. The Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (GI-ESCR) prepared a Research Paper on Security of Tenure: Legal and Judicial Aspects for the Special Rapporteur and participated in an Expert Group Meeting held in Geneva in October 2012. The Research Paper helped inform the Special Rapporteur's report.

In the report, the Special Rapporteur elaborates upon the concept of security of tenure as a component of the right to adequate housing. The backdrop is one of a global tenure insecurity crisis, manifesting itself in many forms and contexts — forced evictions, displacement resulting from development, natural disasters and conflicts and land grabbing — and evident in the millions of urban dwellers living under insecure tenure arrangements.

The Special Rapporteur discussed existing guidance under international human rights law and raised questions regarding the precise State obligations with respect to ensuring security of tenure. She examined the wide range of existing tenure arrangements, and the prevalent focus in policy and practice on one form of tenure: individual freehold. The Special Rapporteur also discussed selected operational and policy challenges pertaining to securing tenure. She concluded by underscoring the need for more specific and comprehensive human rights and operational guidance on security of tenure.

According the the GI-ESCR's Research Paper: "Differing forms of security of tenure across the continuum of tenure types provide varying degrees of security, with this variance often correlated to property or socio-economic status. Guidelines on security of tenure should address this issue of non-discrimination on account of property or other status. Specifically, how can States ensure that all members of society, regardless of property or socio-economic status, enjoy security of tenure on the basis of non-discrimination and equal protection of the law? The solution may require a paradigm shift from correlating security of tenure with a property rights regime to grounding security of tenure solidly in the human rights framework."

More information on the Special Rapporteur's Security of Tenure Project, as well as copies of her report, can be found HERE.

 

You don't have a pdf plugin, but you can download the pdf file.

Complaint filed condemning forced evictions in the Philippines
Featured

Complaint filed condemning forced evictions in the Philippines

Complaint filed before Human Rights Committee condemning forced evictions in the Philippines

 

Press Release

Today the residents of Corazon de Jesus, a community in San Juan City, Metro Manila, filed an Individual Complaint before the Human Rights Committee. The Complaint seeks accountability and remedies from the government of the Philippines for the brutal forced eviction of the community that took place last year. The Complaint also seeks a permanent halt to any further evictions.

As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Philippines is legally obligated to not violate the terms of this human rights treaty, which include a prohibition on forced evictions.

The residents are represented by Defend Job Philippines, a human rights organization based in the Philippines; the Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (GI-ESCR), an international human rights NGO; and the International Human Rights Clinic at the New England University School of Law in the U.S.

According to Melona Daclan of Defend Job Philippines, “The Corazon de Jesus community has resorted to international human rights law to seek accountability for these egregious human rights violations because the courts in the Philippines have refused to enforce the human rights laws that are to protect the citizens of the Philippines.”

Bret Thiele, Co-Executive Director of the Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, added that “international scrutiny is necessary to bring to an end the impunity with which forced evictions are carried out in the Philippines.”

 The Human Rights Committee is an impartial, independent human rights mechanism sitting in Geneva, Switzerland and is mandated with ensuring compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Philippines became a party to the Covenant in 1986 and three years later voluntarily accepted the Individual Complaint mechanism whereby victims of human rights violations can seek to hold States accountable to their human rights obligations and seek remedies when those obligations are violated.

NEWSLETTER

Don´t miss any updates!
Image

Select your language

Social Media:

Log in

Climate and Environmental Justice

We have advanced rights-based and gender-transformative transition frameworks through research that centres the lived experiences of women and marginalised communities on the frontlines of extractive energy policies, promoting climate and energy frameworks attentive to the social and care-related impacts of transition pathways. We have developed a clear vision for a gender-just transition, firmly rooted in gender and human rights norms, establishing both the legal basis and the direction for the transformative changes our planet and societies urgently need. In particular, the ‘Guiding Principles for Gender Equality and Human Rights in the Energy Transition’, a collective effort built through online consultations, an in-person workshop and multiple rounds of revision with activists, practitioners and experts from around the world, outline a transformative vision for reshaping global energy systems through a human rights and gender equality lens.

Our work recognises that the climate emergency is both an existential threat and an opportunity to reimagine societies built on social, gender, economic and environmental justice. We ground our advocacy in feminist and intersectional principles, prioritising the agency and perspectives of communities in the Global South who have contributed the least to the climate emergency yet face its most devastating consequences. Central to our approach is the understanding that energy is not merely a commodity but a fundamental human right; essential for dignity, health, education, work and the realisation of countless other rights. We challenge approaches to the energy transition that risk replicating the harmful patterns of fossil fuel extraction and, instead, advocate for transformative policies that ensure human rights and gender equality as central to building climate-resilient societies rooted in dignity, justice and planetary well-being.

What's next?

We will continue to challenge approaches that treat energy transition as merely a technical shift, instead positioning it as an opportunity to reimagine economies and societies rooted in dignity for all, with particular attention to communities in the Global South who have contributed least to the climate emergency yet are most exposed to its worst effects.

We will connect community-level evidence and the lived experiences of those on the frontlines of extractive policies to national reform and global norm-setting, breaking down silos between human rights, gender, and climate movements, and advancing a shared vision that recognises just transitions as not only fundamental to achieving climate-resilient and sustainable societies, but as transformative pathways that advance social and gender equality, redistribute power and resources equitably, and ensure that energy systems serve the public good rather than profit.

We will mainstream rights-based and genderjust transition priorities in key multilateral spaces (particularly, within the Just Transition Work Programme and the to-be-developed Just Transition Mechanism, within the UNFCCC) to guarantee that just transitions are advanced at all levels.

We will also translate our work, through strategic advocacy, into at least two concrete policy wins, whether promoted, adopted, implemented, or scaled, in priority countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Colombia, South Africa, or Kenya), ensuring these policies align with human rights standards, centre gender equality, and reflect the needs and views of affected communities.

We will build momentum for the progressive recognition of the right to sustainable energy to shift dominant narratives away from purely extractive solutions that sideline gendered impacts, community participation, and Global South perspectives.

Economic Justice and Climate Finance

Our work has transformed the global discussion on fiscal policy in a more just, emancipatory and sustainable direction. Our approach has combined both high-level, expert contributions within decisionmaking circles, with bold, impactful work on narrative change with the general public.

We have been instrumental in the inclusion of human rights as a guiding principle of the future United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, a multilateral instrument with the potential of raising approx. USD 492 billion per year in public revenues currently foregone to global tax abuse. In the process leading to the ‘Compromiso de Sevilla’ decided at FfD4, we proposed and succeeded in creating a specific human rights workstream within the Civil Society Financing for Development Mechanism, which was critical to ensure that explicit commitments on the matter were included in the negotiating outcome. In a context of cutbacks in multilateral institutions, we have amplified the capacities of technical experts, providing rigorous technical support and leveraging our influence to ensure the enactments of groundbreaking standard-setting instruments, such as the 2025 UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Statement on Fiscal Policy and Human Rights, and the first ex oficio hearing on the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights on Fiscal and Economic Policies to Address Poverty and Structural Inequality, leading to an upcoming thematic resolution on the matter. We have also bridged the silos between multilateral tax discussions and climate finance debates, promoting ambitious financing commitments to increase international and domestic resource mobilisation during COP 28, 29 and 30.

At the regional level, our engagement with fiscal cooperation platforms such as the Platform for Fiscal Cooperation of Latin America and the Caribbean (PTLAC), where we are member of its Civil Society Consultative Council, and the African Anti-IFFs Policy Tracker, for which we participated in the pilot mission in Ivory Coast together with Tax Justice Network Africa (TJNA), have been critical in cementing a growing engagement between tax administrations and ministries of finance with international legal experts, exploring actionable and transformative initiatives, such as the taxation of high-net-worth individuals, beneficial ownership registries and corporate countryby-country reports, to be implemented at the international level.

At the local level, our interventions in fiscal reform debates in Chile, Brazil, Colombia and Nigeria have contributed to shaping legislative outcomes in a more progressive, rights-compliant direction.

As for our leadership in narrative change, we have a measurable track record in delivering tailored, innovative campaigns which have decisively expanded economic justice constituencies by appealing to a broader tent. In Latin America and the Caribbean, we created the ‘Date Cuenta’ campaign, coordinating over 40 organisations across civil society to deliver plain language, innovative messaging connecting progressive fiscal reforms to the financing of health, education and social protection. ‘Date Cuenta’ generated over 55 original campaign messages that were tailored to the realities of seven priority countries (Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru and Honduras) and disseminated in Spanish, Portuguese and English. In doing so, we convened more than 65 online co-creation workshops with partners, coordinating a unified communications strategy which combined digital outreach, press and media coverage, and collaboration with influencers. Ultimately, ‘Date Cuenta’ resulted in more than 60,000 interactions on social media, coverage in major regional and international media outlets, including El País, Deutsche Welle, Bloomberg and France 24, and the participation of at least 63 social media influencers through 58 dedicated publications. In collaboration with Fundación Gabo and the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, we also organised a two-day workshop in Bogota with 20 journalists from 13 countries, building a regional network trained in a human rights-based approach to fiscal policy that has since generated published media coverage on outlets such as La Diaria, Ciper, El Diario Ar and Milenio. Through ‘Date Cuenta’ and our regional advocacy, we strengthened civil society engagement in key processes, including the Financing for Development track and FfD4, co-organised highlevel dialogues with states and civil society from Latin America and Africa.

What's next?

We will shape the UN Tax Convention and its Protocols so they embed human rights principles, and we will stay engaged through follow-up processes (including the expected Conference of the Parties) to support effective implementation. We will keep linking tax and climate finance so that new resources mobilised through fiscal cooperation are channelled to adaptation, mitigation, and loss and damage, in line with UNFCCC commitments.

Public Services for Care Societies

We have translated participatory research into accountability and policy outcomes.

In Ivory Coast, our work with Mouvement Ivoirien des Droits Humains and affected communities since 2023 exposed how privatisation and lack of accountability restrict access to quality healthcare. It contributed to the closure of 1,022 illegal private health centres, an executive instrument strengthening the regulation of private hospitals across the country, and the creation of a permanent complaints management committee in healthcare through a bylaw issued by the prefect of Gagnoa. Partners engaged through this process also advanced concrete improvements at facility level: members of the Gagnoa Midwives Association who took part in the participatory action research pooled resources to renovate the neonatal unit of the Regional Hospital, and the Director of the Gagnoa General Hospital launched an action plan to expand services and improve patient reception, with the facility receiving the award for best hospital in the country in 2025.

In Kenya, our research with the Mathare Education Taskforce documented the absence of public schools and the expansion of private provision, evidencing impacts on households and caregivers and strengthening demands for free, quality public education. This work contributed to stronger community agency and collective organisation, alongside ongoing strategies ranging from communications to litigation to secure a public school in the area, some involving GI-ESCR and others led independently.

Across Africa, this work is complemented by a multi-country study examining the human rights implications of austerity in education and health, including how regressive fiscal policies, rising debt burdens and persistent underinvestment undermine the financing and delivery of public services.

In Latin America, from 29 November to 2 December 2021, over a thousand representatives from over one hundred countries, from grassroots movements, advocacy, human rights, and development organisations, feminist movements, trade unions, and other civil society organisations, met in Santiago, Chile, and virtually, to discuss the critical role of public services for our future. Following the meeting, the Santiago Declaration on Public Services was adopted to demand universal access to quality, gender-transformative and equitable public services as the foundation of a fair and just society.

We are currently advancing work on care systems, linking public services and fiscal justice through integrated research, advocacy and communications, including a regional campaign framing care as a collective responsibility requiring sustained public investment.

What's next?

In Ivory Coast, we will evaluate and strengthen the complaints management committee and position it as a replicable model for other health facilities. In Kenya, we will support the Mathare community to co-design a model public school for Mabatini and Ngei wards, grounded in human rights standards. Building on our multi-country austerity study, we will drive national advocacy on financing for education and health: advancing reforms in Ghana; launching a fiscal policy and public services financing agenda in Kenya through the CESCR process and targeted coalition work; and, in Nigeria, using the new tax acts in force since 1 January 2026 to catalyse a national accountability campaign for adequately funded, quality public services. In Latin America, we will amplify locally led care pilots across 8 countries and turn lessons into influence—advancing care policies that strengthen care organisations, protect care workers’ rights, support unpaid caregivers, include disability and family networks, and redistribute care more equitably.