Category: Working Papers

Finding a Balance: Privacy and Safety

by Leo Mata

5 APR 2017

Considering the most recent release of information by WikiLeaks, and the ongoing 2016 election investigation, it seems as apt a time as ever to reevaluate the right of privacy and how far it truly protects the individual. In the United States, while the right to privacy is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has looked to various amendments to establish this right through decades of court jurisprudence. In contrast, the right to privacy has been enshrined in at least 170 constitutions across the globe. Moreover the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy, Joseph Cannataci, has stated that “[article] 12 of the UNDHR and [article] 17 of the ICCPR do not state that the right to privacy is a right which is only enjoyed by the citizens of one’s own state.” So, it should not matter whether your own country has a constitutional provision safeguarding individual privacy, as long as that country has signed onto the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Yet, it is worth noting that even within each of these avenues for protection, constitutional or treaty based, there are limits to the protection. The line for protection is usually drawn around the ideas of unlawful interference or arbitrariness. The important question here, then, is: How do we balance our need to prevent attacks by foreign agents and our right to privacy?

Looking at the United States, we can track a variety of spying scandals as examples. The idea of spying on U.S. citizens is neither uncommon or unheard of. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in its history has tracked such notable figures as Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and Eleanor Roosevelt, and was implicated, along with other agencies, in the Watergate scandal. The government said it monitored Rev. King out of fear that his movement was being infiltrated by communists, and this reasoning was enough for the Attorney General to approve monitoring. In the modern era, combating foreign actors is often the guise under which government agencies justify domestic spying. Learning from our past mistakes, the United States established the FISA Court which is designed to act as a safeguard against unnecessary intrusions into our lives while allowing the government to monitor for foreign intelligence purposes. However, despite this level of protection there have been numerous reports of the National Surveillance Agency (NSA) acting beyond their legal scope. So, we must ask, is the FISA Court a sufficient level of protection against the abuse of an individual’s right to privacy? Even the Court itself has acknowledged it has a limited ability to protect our right to privacy.

The recent trove of documents released by WikiLeaks identify methods, such as the installation of spyware into your smart TV or smart phone, that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) could use to gather information. The idea that the CIA can hack into devices is nothing new, spying is in fact what their job entails as a means of protecting the United States, but when placed side by side with a history of abuse, it is hard to not fear a violation of privacy. This has, justifiably, put many on edge. However, it is important to note that the tools released are older and have reportedly been patched by the respective technology companies.

Putting the WikiLeaks release aside, there seems to be little concern from the public over what U.S. intelligence agencies do in their efforts to conduct foreign surveillance. However, what has raised some concerns is when foreign surveillance includes the surveillance of U.S. citizens. Recently, this has come to the attention of many Americans with the announcement that surveillance of U.S. citizens occurred while intelligence agencies monitored Russian communications during the 2016 election. It should be noted that this type of surveillance on U.S. citizens falls into a category known as incidental collection. While incidental collection is nothing new, the ongoing 2016 election investigation has resulted in the release of names and information of U.S. citizens. The disclosure of personal information has caused some people to worry that the intelligence community is not protecting our information as closely as they contend. However, this is the FISA Amendments Act doing exactly what it is designed to do. While incidental surveillance will always be an issue if surveillance exists, the recent focus on it is more relevant than ever as the FISA Amendments Act is set to expire on December 31, 2017. This presents an opportunity for Americans to voice their concerns and either continue down the path we are on, or request that changes be made.

For some, these methods of spying and releasing of personal information will create paranoia, for others anger, but for most they will create no disruption to their daily lives. Each of these responses alone demonstrates a failure within our society. In the face of the ever-growing foreign threats, it is of the utmost importance that we have a conversation about how we combat it. As members of society do we not owe a duty to one another to prevent harm from befalling us? If so, to what length does that duty extend? Should the government be given greater leeway in protecting civilians from terrorism, or would we rather risk greater harm for greater privacy? Is it enough to leave it to private companies to push back against government intrusions? If history is any indicator it seems that our privacy rights will continue to give way to combat the grave threats before us. To prevent this seemingly inevitable future, as we move forward in our efforts to protect Americans—and whatever the next threat may be—the logic behind the need for surveillance should not go unchallenged or be considered infallible. Just because the right to privacy was not designed to be an absolute right does not mean it should be cast aside.

Leo Mata is a J.D. student at Texas Law, Rapoport Center Fellow, and a member of the 2016-2017 Working Paper Series Editorial Committee.

The Weight of Stigma and Segregation: Examining the Denial of Equal Education Opportunities to Roma Communities in EU Countries as an Abuse of Human Rights

by Claudia Kania

22 MAR 2017

The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination released a statement in 2000 that acknowledged “the place of the Roma communities [is] among those most disadvantaged and most subject to discrimination in the contemporary world.” Such socially and institutionally accepted xenophobia is perhaps most clearly epitomized by its breach into the European school system. Although academic institutions are often times portrayed as “the great equalizer” within Western societies, walls founded on the principles of ignorance and prejudice frequently separate European Roma from reaping their benefits.  

The impartial right to education is universally established as a fundamental guiding principle within international human rights discourse. It is recognized as a human right and protected by Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as Articles 28, 29, and 40 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. To further contextualize the premise of academic equity, UNESCO put forth the 1960 Convention against Discrimination in Education, an international legislative framework adopted to promote “the ideal of equality of educational opportunity without regard to race, sex or any distinctions, economic or social.” Education is not only a right in and of itself, but also an intrinsic vehicle in realizing other rights. It is an instrument vital in securing a life free of financial hardship, disenfranchisement, and social exclusion.

A report released in 2016 detailed the true scope of Roma communities’ expulsion to the fringes of European society. In total, approximately 17% of EU citizens are at risk of poverty, while that number is more than four times higher for Romani individuals; in the month prior to the study, only about 30% of Romani households received paid work. The Office for National Statistics revealed that out of 60,000 individuals who identified as Roma, 60% had no formal schooling. Moreover, Roma individuals are often times the victims of hate crimes and police brutality.  

Segregation remains one of the primary obstacles standing between Roma pupils and equal education opportunities. Although prejudice is sometimes blatantly propagated by biased media and political campaigns, such instances present a gateway to less conspicuous modes of discrimination. For instance, lower expectations for Roma students subsequently lead to higher dropout rates within their communities, which substantially decreases the prospects of secondary and tertiary education for Roma individuals. This, in turn, translates to higher unemployment rates and hinders the participation of Roma in the democratic process. Thus, the cycle continues. A 2015 report by Amnesty International illustrates discriminatory placement of Romani students in classes physically away from their non-Roma peers. A UNICEF report, specifically noting a 2002 case in Hungary, states that in general all-Roma classrooms typically lack fundamental resources otherwise available to students not of the Roma ethnicity, including experienced teachers and up-to-date curricula. More recently, the European Commission specifically targeted discrimination within Hungarian schools. Although EU member states are expected to abide by equal education frameworks, legal directives such as the Racial Equality Directive and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights oftentimes have little impact on institutionalized forms of ethnic discrimination. 

In 2012, The Slovakian Regional Court condemned the segregation of Roma in its schools. Although the ruling sent a message to the Slovakian Ministry of Education regarding the country’s international obligations to provide impartial access to education, it did little to prevent ethnic-based segregation. Not only do schools continue to run all-Roma classes, but Slovakian Roma pupils are faced with the prospect of being sent to “container schools”- schools made from material resembling shipping containers, and isolated from the rest of Slovak society. Apart from their extreme impoverishment, these schools are also homogeneous. When the guardians of Roma students attempt to enroll their children in non-container schools their pleas are refused by school board officials, who argue that their schools do not have the capacity to accommodate Roma pupils. Indeed, the container schools were instilled as a cursory solution to the problem of overcapacity. However, the “convenient” construction of substandard learning institutions within close geographic proximity to Roma settlements is nothing other than an arm of ethnic discrimination and social exclusion, as noted by Amnesty International. Recent reports delineate Slovakia’s shortcomings in guaranteeing its Roma citizens equal treatment.

The European Roma community also faces another kind of widespread segregation. Roma pupils are frequently placed in learning disability schools, regardless of scholastic comprehension. A 2013 ruling by the European Court of Human Rights remarked that Hungary’s systematic misdiagnosis of learning disabilities violated the European Convention on Human Rights. A 2012 report by the Roma Education Fund highlights the prejudicial nature of such entrance level examinations, focusing specifically on their cultural and linguistic biases.

Presently, cases of outright denial to enroll Romani children to academic institutions continue to remain prominent. The mayors of several French municipalities refused to enroll Roma children in public schools on the basis of lack of certification. Certification, however, is not easily achieved by Roma parents as informal settlements are almost never recognized by government officials. As identity documents remain largely inaccessible to Roma individuals, most families thus remain under the status of statelessness. Thus, admission, in most cases, is granted only after the intervention of the French Ombudsmen. A recent article by the New York Times highlights the bureaucratic obstacles Roma students face when attempting to gain access to French schools. Recently, the country made headlines due to the forced evacuation of hundreds of Roma families.

Former Columbia Law professor Jack Greenberg linked the Roma battle for equal education to the American Civil Rights Movement. Both groups have experienced the harrowing realities of slavery, societal disenfranchisement, and discrimination, propagated in part by stereotyping in biased media. Just as African Americans fought for the right for citizenship in the 19th century, countless stateless European Roma individuals embark on a similar mission today. The doctrine of “separate but equal” plagues much of contemporary European society. Schools today segregate non-Roma students from their Roma peers, providing the latter with substandard educational resources; the case of Horváth and Kiss v Hungary bears a resemblance to Brown v Board of Education. Although both rely on the concept of strategic litigation, the successful implementation of anti-discriminatory education policy is currently a far reach for contemporary Europe. It will require not only the willingness of policymakers, but also the active mobilization of Roma civil society. Locally, individual schools should engage in active redistricting in order to achieve ethnic diversity within academic institutions, as well as incorporate Romani culture into standing curricula to promote diversity and ethnic tolerance. It is well within the means of any school within the EU to guarantee an environment based on social inclusion and academic equity. Likewise, it is crucial that international bodies, such as the European Commission and European Union,  apply political pressure on national governments to uphold international and national legislative standards of equality.  The implementation of such standards and their effects on academic institutions should be monitored by national bodies, benefiting from sustainability through the intersection of interests of both grassroot NGOs and international donors.

Claudia Kania is a freelance writer and independent researcher. Her most recent work has been featured by the Oxford Human Rights Hub, the Yale Broad Recognition, and the University of Cambridge Centre of Human Rights and Governance. Her research interests include minority rights, gender violence, and education policy.

The Human Right to Education: Mercosur Commitment and Economic Inequality

by Craig Lauchner

Publication forthcoming in the Texas International Law Journal

Abstract:

Access to quality education has improved significantly throughout Latin America over the past three decades as a result of substantial investment in education at the national level. One driver of that investment has been Mercosur’s robot coordination within its member states, underscored by a strong commitment to the human right to education. While efforts to improve educational opportunity have contributed to a marked decline in the level of income inequality in the region, overall economic inequality has stagnated. Initiatives aimed at combating inequality through the promotion and protection of the human right to education—specifically those of Mercosur’s Educational Sector (SEM)—may have the unintended consequence of perpetuating already existing educational inequalities and, by extension, economic inequality among and within the block’s member states. Rather than leveling the economic playing field, investment in education in some cases appears to be subsidizing the rich while offering no more than a basic floor of protection against gross violations of the human right to education.

Resumen:

En las últimas tres décadas, el acceso a la educación de calidad en América Latina ha crecido significativamente como resultado de una inversión sustantiva en educación por parte de los gobiernos nacionales. Un impulso para ello fue la coordinación entre Estados del Mercosur sumado a un fuerte compromiso con el derecho humano a la educación. Mientras que los esfuerzos por mejorar las oportunidades educativas contribuyeron a disminuir los niveles de desigualdad económica, lo cierto, es que la desigualdad general permanece. Así, los incentivos dirigidos a combatir la desigualdad a través de la promoción y la protección del derecho humano a la educación- especialmente los provenientes del Sector Educativo del Mercosur (PASEM)- en una de esas han generado consecuencias indeseadas como ser, perpetuar las desigualdades educativas existentes, y por extensión, las desigualdades económicas entre y al interior de los miembros del bloque. En vez de nivelar el campo de juego, la inversión en educación, en algunos casos, parece subsidiar a los ricos mientras que solo ofrece un piso mínimo de protección contra groseras violaciones del derecho humano a la educación.

Beyond Kafala: Remedying Human Rights Abuses of Migrant Workers in the Persian Gulf

by Ryan Jones

View/download paper

Abstract:

The six nations that comprise the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)—Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—have found themselves severely criticized for the abhorrent conditions that migrant workers frequently face in these countries. One common target of criticism is the kafala system, used to regulate migrant workers in the Persian Gulf and neighboring Arab states. The kafala system requires foreign workers to obtain a sponsor—typically the migrant’s employer—and receive permission before leaving or changing jobs. Many critics argue that the power kafala gives to employers fosters human rights abuses, including nonpayment of wages, inhumane living conditions, human trafficking, as well as physical, sexual, and psychological abuse. As a result, these critics have called for the repeal of kafala as well as a push for additional labor law reform and stricter enforcement. However, as evidenced by Bahrain’s unsuccessful efforts to curtail abuse by dismantling kafala through outreach and labor law reform, merely removing the traditional pillars of kafala is insufficient. This paper examines the method of “root cause analysis” employed by many NGOs and activist groups, drawing on Susan Marks’ critique of such thinking. I argue that attention to legal conditions is insufficient, and that abuses in the GCC are unlikely to significantly subside until gross economic inequality between labor source nations and the GCC is reduced. I also consider an argument made by Eric Posner and Glen Weyl suggesting that the most effective way to combat economic inequality between countries is to encourage migration as it exists in the GCC—by drawing extremely high numbers of a country’s workforce from some of the world’s poorest nations.

Keywords: Kafala, migrant workers, Bahrain, economic inequality, root cause analysis

Resumen:

Las seis naciones que comprenden el Consejo de Cooperación para los Estados Arábes del Golfo (CCG)- Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Arabia Saudita y los Emiratos Arabes Unidos- han recibido importantes críticas por las aborrecibles condiciones de trabajo que enfrentan los trabajadores migrantes en esos países. Una crítica frecuente es al sistema kafala, sistema utilizado para regular a los trabajores migrantes en el Golfo Pérsico y los países arábes de la zona. El sistema kafala exige que un trabajador extranjero obtenga un auspicio -típicamente por parte del empleador del migrante- y deba obtener permiso antes de dejar o cambiar un trabajo. Mucho críticos argumentan que el poder que el sistema kafala le otorga a los empleadores fomenta violaciones a los derechos humanos, que pueden incluir el no pago del salario, condiciones de habitabilidad inhumanas, trata de personas, como también abusos físicos, sexuales y psicológicos. Como resultado de estos, los críticos sostienten que debe terminarse el sistema kafala y adicionalmente debe producirse una reforma en la legislación laboral que también debe ser aplicada de forma más estricta. Sin embargo, Bahrain fracasó al intentar terminar con los abusos tan solo desmentalando el Kakala y produciendo algunas reformas laborales, lo que muestra que tan solo remover los pilares del sistema kafala no es suficiente. Este artículo examina el método “análisis de las raíces de una problema” que utilizan muchas ONGs y activistas siguiendo las críticas de Susan Marks. Argumento que poner atención tan solo a las conficiones legales es insuficiente, y que los abusos en el CCG no van parar hasta tanto las groseras inequidades entre las naciones que ofrecen los trabajos y el CCG se reduzcan. Asimismo, considero un argumento de Eric Posner y Glen Wey, estos autores sugieren que la forma más efectiva de combatir la desigualdad económica entre los países es alentar la migración tal cual existe en el CCG, es decir, mediante la extracción de un número extremadamente alto de la fuerza de trabajo para un país de algunas de las naciones más pobres del mundo.

About the author:

Ryan Jones is a JD student at the University of Texas School of Law.

#RefugeesNotWelcome: Making Gendered Sense of Transnational Asylum Politics on Twitter

by Inga Helgudóttir Ingulfsen

View/download paper

Winner, Audre Rapoport Prize for Scholarship on Gender and Human Rights (2016)

Please note that in November 2017, Helgudóttir Ingulfsen wrote a follow-up post to this paper, entitled “3 Reasons Why We Need Critical Feminist Theory More Than Ever in the Age of Big Data” (available here).

Abstract:

This paper explores strategies to justify refugee exclusion that are employed by Twitter users who tweet with the hashtag #refugeesnotwelcome. The tweets, understood as transnational nodes of discourse within a transnational platform for identity politics, are analyzed by combining particular theories of nationalism and immigration that are concerned with the gendered cultural construction of identity politics. I demonstrate how the Twitter users imagine themselves as a White Western Enlightened community in binary opposition to refugees who are cast as threats to the community’s racial and cultural preservation, and show how the construction of these binary oppositions relies on inherently gendered discursive strategies.

Keywords: gender, refugees, immigration, nationalism, transnational discourses, identity politics

Read a response to this paper by Courtney McGinn and Reina Wehbi

About the author:

Inga Ingulfsen is a Research Analyst, Global Partnerships at Foundation Center, where she supports the organization’s global programs, focused on building partnerships around data and knowledge sharing among philanthropic organizations around the world.

Inga received her MS in Global Affairs from New York University, focusing on peacebuilding, gender and migration. During her graduate studies, Inga worked for the United Nations in New York and Amman, supporting policy development and research on conflict-related sexual violence and regional governance and peacebuilding. Her graduate thesis, “#RefugeesNotWelcome: Making Gendered Sense of Transnational Asylum Politics on Twitter”, earned her the 2016 Center for Global Affairs Outstanding Thesis Award and the Audre Rapoport Prize for Scholarship on Gender and Human Rights, as well as an invitation to present her research to the Data & Research Department at UN Women. Inga received her BA in International Studies from the University of Oslo and has several years of experience working in public administration in Norway.

A Move Towards Acceptance of Transgender Women in the Middle East

by Courtney McGinn

10 NOV 2016

On May 27, 2016, Talleen Abu Hanna, 21, became the first Miss Trans Israel. On an international scale, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals face discrimination not only by those in their communities, but also by the legislation and court systems that are entrusted with the duty to protect society. In most Middle Eastern countries,[1] homosexual and transgendered individuals are shunned, mistreated, harassed, and even killed. Due to the recent transgender beauty pageant held in Israel, there may be a cultural shift to public acceptance for the LGBT community in this part of the world.

Out of the seventeen countries in the Middle East, eleven are state parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.[2] Yet at least thirteen countries in the region still criminalize homosexuality. In Iran, sodomy is a capital offense often punished by execution.[3] In Saudi Arabia and Yemen, sodomy is punishable by death. In other countries, namely Bahrain, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, and Syria, homosexual and transgendered individuals face constant threats of imprisonment.  Even in countries that have not yet enacted anti-LGBT laws, individuals are arbitrarily punished in retaliation for their sexual identity.

The Israeli government is much more friendly to the LGBT community in comparison to the rest of the Middle East. In March 2014, the government adopted Amendment No. 4 to the Pupil’s Rights Law 5761-2000, whereby sexual orientation and gender identity were added to the prohibited grounds of discrimination against pupils.[4] With this amendment, the government ensured that transgender men and women would be acknowledged as their chosen gender and allowed the same benefits as the rest of the citizens in the country. Unlike other countries in the region, sodomy is not a crime in Israel. This year, Israel will also host its 18th annual Tel Aviv Pride Parade, which is expected to draw nearly 200,000 participants, 35,000 of which are coming from countries worldwide.

The acceptance of the LGBT community in Tel Aviv is celebrated around the world. In 2012, Tel Aviv was named the world’s top gay city by GayCities.com, and this year, was named “the gayest city on earth” by the Boston Globe.[5] Although this shows great progress within Israel, there is still room for improvements. The rest of Israel is not as accepting of the LGBT community as Tel Aviv, and hate crimes against members of the LGBT community are still common. Furthermore, under the current law, same-sex couples cannot marry and are barred from surrogacy programs.[6] By hosting the Miss Trans Israel pageant in years to come, Israel has the opportunity instill into its citizens a growing acceptance of the LGBT community.

The Miss Trans Israel is much more than a beauty pageant; it provides a platform for women to talk about their circumstances and raise awareness of the LGBT community. As the winner of Miss Trans Israel, Talleen Abu Hanna was able to share her story in Barcelona at the Miss Trans Star International pageant, where she won first runner up. The founder of Miss Trans Star International, Thara Wells, emphasized that the pageant “is an attempt to engage society. We want to go beyond beauty and tell the life story of each girl.”[7] In order to raise awareness, there must be platforms for individuals to speak out about the discrimination, violence, and harassment they face due to their sexual orientation and identity. These beauty pageants not only provide that platform, but also encourage transgender women to embrace their femininity instead of hiding it.

Work Cited

[1] For purposes of this commentary, the Middle East consists of the following countries: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen.
[2] Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations, ‘Ratification status by country or by treaty’, http://indicators.ohchr.org.
[3] Islamic Penal Code of Iran of 1991, Book 2, Part 2 (Punishment for Sodomy), Article 110: “Punishment for sodomy is killing; the Sharia judge decides on how to carry out the killing.”
[4] Human Rights Committee Concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of Israel, CCPR/C/ISR/CO/4, November 21, 2014.
[5] Meet the Arab Woman Who Has Just Become the First Miss Trans Israel, (May 31, 2016), http://time.com/4352201/talleen-abu-hanna-first-miss-trans-israel/.
[6] Id.
[7] Miss Brazil Rafaela Manfrini Crowned Miss Trans Star International 2016 (Sept. 21, 2016), http://www.newnownext.com/transgender-beauty-pageant-europe/09/2016/.

Courtney McGinn is a LLM student at Texas Law and member of the 2016-2017 Working Paper Series Editorial Committee

Girl Branded: Nike, the UN and the Construction of the Entrepreneurial Adolescent Girl Subject

by Maria Hengeveld

View/download paper

Winner, Audre Rapoport Prize for Scholarship on Gender and Human Rights (2015)

Abstract:

With the rise of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and philanthro-capitalism since the early 2000s, transnational corporations (TNCs) have come to play a prominent role in international policy debates on sustainable development and human rights. A key feature of the growing corporate interest in poverty reduction is its faith in feminist ideas as tools for change. Spearheaded by the ‘Girl Effect’ campaign of athletic apparel giant Nike (since 2008), development institutions and aid agencies have largely embraced the idea that ‘rebranding girls’ in the Global South as untapped market potential and training them as self-confident, entrepreneurial market actors represents the key to solving poverty. In an attempt to gauge the growing influence of TNCs on development policy, this article analyzes the principles and the actual effects of the Girl Effect and compares it with Nike’s own interests as a corporation built on women’s labor. It argues that contrary to freeing girls’ potential, the Girl Effect project capitalizes on patriarchy to depoliticize poverty and inequality. Far from empowering women or supporting the poor, Nike’s rebranding project is an attempt to discipline girls, and the NGOs that represent them, into behaviors that support the status quo, distract from corporations’ misbehavior and expand the power of the market.

Keywords: corporations, globalization, Girl Effect, sweatshops, poverty, development, feminism

Resumen:

Desde el inicio de la decada del 2000, el crecimiento de los programas de Responsabilidad Social Empresaria (RSC) y el capitalismo filantrópico, han dado un lugar cada vez mas relevante a las corporaciones transacionales (TNCs) en los debates internacionales sobre las políticas en torno al desarrollo sustentable y los derechos humanos. Un rasgo que sobresale de las campañas de las corporaciones de reducción de pobreza es su fe en que las ideas feministas pueden ser un motor de cambio. Inspirados en la campaña “Girl Effect” llevada adelante por el gigante de la ropa deportiva Nike (desde 2008), instituciones dedicadas al desarrollo y a campañas de alivio de la pobreza han adoptado la idea de que “apuntar a las mujeres como marca” del Sur Global, que representan un mercado a explorar, entrenarlas en ganar autoestima y en convertirse en actores del mercado empresarial, puede ser una  clave para combatir la pobreza. En un intento por medir la creciente influencia de las TNCs  en las políticas del desarrollo, este artículo analiza los principios y los efectos de la campaña “Girl Effect” y los compara con los  propios intereses de Nike, una corporación construida en base al trabajo de las mujeres. Se argumenta que la campaña “Girl Effect” en vez de colaborar en liberar el potencial de las mujeres, utiliza el patriarcado para despolitizar la pobreza y la inequidad. Lejos de empoderar a las mujeres o apoyar a los pobres,  el “apuntar a las mujeres como marca” de Nike es un intento por disciplinar a las mujeres y a las ONGs que las representan en la importancia de mantener el status quo, distraerlas de las malas conductas de las corporaciones y expandir el poder del mercado.

Read a commentary response to this issue:

“Nike’s Girl Effect and the Privatization of Feminism”
By: Megan Tobias Neely

About the author:

Maria Hengeveld is a researcher and journalist who writes about inequality, gender, globalization and corporations. This paper is based on the M.A thesis she wrote as a Fulbright Fellow in human rights at Columbia University in 2015. Earlier this year, Hengeveld conducted a research project in Vietnam, funded by the 2015 IF Stone Award from The Nation Institute for Investigative Reporting, to test the Girl Effect standards in Nike’s own factories. There, she interviewed 18 women who work for Nike about the factory and living conditions they face. To read more of Hengeveld’s work, she blogs at Africa is a Country and tweets @HengeveldMaria.

Eliciting Self-determination: The Kayapo Mobilization Through Activism and Global Indigenous Media

by Carla Silva-Muhammad

View/download paper

Abstract:

Exactly how do indigenous actors elicit the right of self-determination as inherited, and to what extent does such agency reconstitute or validate human rights norms? This essay proposes that within their unique project of self-representation and activism, the Kayapo indigenous society is indeed reformulating the concept of self-determination. I suggest that by denouncing injustice and human rights violations through self-documentation and use of global indigenous media, protests, and political alliances, this indigenous group is not only claiming reparations from the Brazilian government, but also reshaping the language of human rights. Moreover, this essay explores how the Kayapo communities engage in activism pertaining to the construction of the Belo Monte Dam, developing an international political identity in order to guarantee their right to self-determination and survival.

Keywords: indigenous peoples, self-determination, collective rights, global indigenous media

Bureaucratic Activism and Colombian Community Mothers: The Daily Construction of the Rule of Law

by Lina Buchely

View/download paper

Winner, Audre Rapoport Prize for Scholarship on Gender and Human Rights (2014)

Abstract:

Whereas mainstream literature affirms that the rule of law is an abstract concept that comes from democracy and liberal institutional systems, people in the local Global South do not experience this certainty. In some ways, the rule of law is a product of the daily life transactions and bargains of social actors. This article analyzes the case of community mothers as street-level bureaucrats who produce the rule of law in their local spaces, within an institutional or democratic mechanism. This case study of community mothers, developed between June 2012 and February 2013, shows how street-level bureaucrats use the rule of law as a tool of empowerment. Community mothers display an undocumented agency that develops a feminist agenda of helping fellow women, contrary to the government agenda that promotes childcare and the early childhood program policies. In this sense, the fieldwork undertaken portrays mothers and children as conflicting actors. Despite this, the social policy hides this conflict reproducing the normative image that ideologically links mothers with their children. The results of this research project reveal, therefore, that the local agents as the street level bureaucrats play an unexpected role in the power dynamics inherent to the rule of law.

Keywords: community mothers, feminism, Latin America, street level bureaucracy, rule of law

About the author:

Lina Buchely earned her doctorate in law from Universidad de los Andes (Bogotá, Colombia) in 2014. She is currently a professor and director of the Gender Studies Group at Universidad Icesi (Cali, Colombia).

Human Security and Women’s Human Rights: Reinforcing Protection in the Context of Violence Against Women

by Dorothy Estrada-Tanck

View/download paper

Abstract:

Considering the human security approach to critical risks and vulnerabilities, this paper explores violence against women as one of the most pervasive and widespread threats worldwide. While there is a general understanding that the human security analysis and the human rights legal framework intersect, so far the ways in which the two concepts can mutually reinforce each other has rarely been assessed. Thus, this paper looks more closely at the UN conception of human security in relation specifically to violence against women. It reflects critically on how a gendered human security would have to be shaped and studies its connection with human rights, covering the UN and regional normative landscapes and reviewing paradigmatic cases by the Inter-American and European Courts of Human Rights as exemplifying some of the potentials of the human security-human rights symbiosis. The concept of violence against women, strongly developed by international human rights law, has seldom been contemplated explicitly in human security concerns of violence. This text then examines the consequences of applying a human security lens to the legal analysis of violence against women and their human rights, and of including the human rights definition of violence against women within the human security sphere. In doing so, it spells out the added value of this dialogue and brings to light the synergies between human security and the human rights of women experiencing structural vulnerability in everyday life.

Keywords: women’s rights; violence against women; human security