How human resources services can empower jobseekers with disabilities – Side event March the 17 th , Permanent Mission of Austria

People with disabilities represent a significant group in our society and a big potential not fully realized. As reminded by H.E. Thomas Hajnoczi, Permanent representative of Austria to the UN in Geneva, there are all types of barriers hindering the full enjoyment of a normal life, may them be physical, economical, social, or obstacles to health services, access to education, employment full time. The reasons of this marginalization may be different, from the weak voice people with disabilities have in the political process, to the lack of comparable data on labor market participation that limits the interventions. On the bright side, polices of inclusiveness are developing, Austria and other countries have laws binding companies to employ one person with disability every 25 employees. Most of the time though the companies prefer to pay the sanction instead of complying with the quota.

The testimony of Fernanda Almeida, President of the National Federation of Persons with Autism from Brazil and member of RIADIS, stressed the difficulty for employers to see beyond the appearances. For her, as for Matthieu Chatelin, Cerebral Palsy European Community’s Association and Youth leader of the European Disability Forum, a good CV is not sufficient. There are numerous barriers to overcome, from the initial demonstration that they are capable of doing their job to the adjustment in terms of space. Some employers do not consider how easy it can be to overcome structural barriers because they just focus on what they cannot do.

Education is highlighted by all the panelist as the most important tool to overcome the difficulties, as instrument that can guarantee a future within the society. It is a responsibility of the States to assure accessibility to education, training and employment, but usually it is not guaranteed. The isolated condition in which the State leaves people with disabilities, may it be a direct or indirect result, is an alarm for the civil society organizations that work hard to give fair chances to people with disabilities.

Ms. Virginia Carcedo Illera, CEO and General manager of Incerta empleo, showed the effort and work realized by Incerta during the years of its existence. Working for university and employment accessibility and inserting over 200 thousand people with disabilities in its database. With a system based on ICF skill oriented approach, they connect people to the companies, focusing on the capabilities and compatibility with the firm.

On the same issue, Zero Project, as an international initiative founded by the Austrian ESSL foundation, monitors the application of the CRPD and identifies effective solutions and promotes knowledge exchange. The data resulted from the 2017 research showed, as already presented by the other panelists, that the laws existing are not in use and often there is no data on the condition of labor and education accessibility of people with disabilities. These deficiencies of the States show the marginal role given to the issue and the lack of interest in changing the existing situation.

Lorena-Homar
Lorena Homar, Olympic Swimmer

In conclusion, the panelists stressed the importance of a fair and equal access to education, apprenticeship and employment. To be treated as equally capable of doing a job and equally in need of living the world and relating with people is the most important thing the civil society and the companies, the governments and the employer could do. The relegation doesn’t help neither the person with disabilities nor the State, because it would miss the potentialities of its own citizens.

 

Beatrice Bilotti

Transforming lives: The power of human rights education

This is the title of a beautiful exhibition on human rights education, which was launched on 6 March and which is taking place until 17 March at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, in parallel to the 34th session of the Human Rights Council. You are all welcome to visit!
The exhibition reiterates the vital role of human rights education and training in the promotion of dignity, equality and peace and in the prevention of human rights violations and abuses. It examines what human rights education is, and its impact on the increasingly challenging world in which we live. It also offers inspiration and hope for individuals to engage and take action.
This exhibition is co-organized by the NGO Working Group on Human Rights Education chaired by OIDEL, together with Soka Gakkai International and HRE 2020, Global Coalition for Human Rights Education.
Claire de Lavernette

 

 

Le déchaînement d’une nouvelle société : l’interdépendance des droits de l’homme II

 

Les enjeux liés à la société de l’information doit nous aider à affiner notre réflexion sur le droit à la liberté d’opinion et d’expression. On considère habituellement ce droit comme un droit liberté comme s’il suffisait à l’état de le garantir pour le faire respecter, contrairement aux droits économiques, sociaux et culturels qui seraient des droits prestations. Il est clair depuis longtemps que cette distinction est peu pertinente : le droit à la liberté d’expression ne se réduit pas à la non-censure de la part des autorités; la liberté de presse, par exemple, a toujours exigé de la part des états une action positive, généralement sous forme de subventions.

 

Aujourd’hui face aux nouvelles technologies il est devenu évident que la mise en œuvre de la liberté d’expression réclame un effort de l’Etat pour la mise en place d’infrastructure qui permette la connexion aux réseaux mondiaux de communication. Il convient de rappeler qu’il existe de nombreux  pays dans lesquelles de grandes étendues sont totalement dépourvues d’électricité.  Dans ce nouveau contexte, la distinction entre droits liberté et droits prestation semble définitivement périmée.

 

Il est évident qu’un développement équitable des technologies de l’information et de la communication est absolument indispensable non seulement à la promotion, mais aussi au respect des droits de l’homme. De nos jours, il est juste de considérer qu’un peuple qui n’a pas accès à ces technologies est lésé dans son droit d’opinion et d’expression, tant sa capacité de s’informer et de s’exprimer est réduite par rapport aux autres. La société de l’information qui nous amène de nouveaux outils pour lutter en faveur des droits de l’homme peut devenir paradoxalement aussi une source d’inégalité en creusant le fossé qui sépare les plus riches des plus pauvres.

 

Alfred Fernandez

The responsibility of states in the migration crisis

 Last 29th of June OIDEL attended to a side event at the UNOG about “Protection of Human Rights while adressing large movements of migrants and refugees”. There, two UN speakers and two civil society speakers gave their point of view about the worldwide refugees crisis. 

 

Next September will take place, at the UN headquarters in New York, a high-level meeting on refugees and migrants. Thus, it is the ideal moment to make a few reviews to see what is the situation like and what have we done so far to solve this humanitarian issue.

We are in front of the most important historical crisis of migration, with more than 66 million people being displaced internally and externally around the world. It is true that the convention of 1951 has saved many refugees till today, but new actions must be undertaken as soon as possible, due to the massive dimension of this crisis without precedents.  These actions cannot be individual actions anymore, as it is not a problem of an individual country but of the whole world.

The reason of this crisis is not just a reason of mobility; it is also a reason of capacity and competency in the protection of those leaving their homes, and obviously a crisis of values. All these millions of people leaving their lands are just leaving because remaining is not an option anymore if they want to be saved and have a future.  The obvious reaction of countries against this crisis should at least be compassion towards them.

However, we can see that there is a massive gap between this situation and the countries’ policies, especially in wealthy countries, that are directed in externalizing their responsibilities to others. Indeed, countries with human rights developed structures are not just made for helping migrants and refugees but rather for increasing barriers to avoid them from arriving;  this was recently seen in Europe through Turkey. Thus, the “humanitarian action” instead of being focused on helping migrants to arrive in order to save their lives, is being used to reduce the number of migrants arriving to their countries.

The consequences of those policies in wealthy countries are already happening, for instance:   patrols looking out in high seas in order to return migrants to their homes, an increase of xenophobia and discrimination in their civil society and a justification in poor countries to justify their abuses.

It is very difficult to see in these actions the compassion that humanity should have in front of these situations. Especially when we realize that while there are wealthy countries who think that 30 thousand refugees per country create a crisis in their countries, there are hundreds of thousands of refugees in Africa for whom no one cares.

Therefore, it is time to decide how we want to be remembered in the future. Next September it is a good opportunity to change the direction of our policies toward migrants and refugees; if not for ourselves, let’s do it for our children.

Pere Grau Callizo

imigrants

Human Rights and Corruption

One year after the Revolution of 2011, a side event was organized and planned to discuss the finding of the high commissions report. This event aimed to compliment and strengthen the existing mechanisms in order to prevent and counter corruption.

Since then, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was created, in which one of its agreements was to significantly reduce illicit financial flaws in an aim to combat corruption; a fundamental factor needed to achieve all goals of the agenda. The Human Rights Council has been paying increasing attention to combatting corruption, and after conducting several investigations, has found that “treaty bodies mismanagement are a resource of corruption. Approximately 2% of GDP is bribed in both developed and underdeveloped countries.” B.E. Ayush claimed. “It is estimated that developed countries lose about one trillion dollars annually”.

Reducing bribery in corruption, not only increases equality, but also opportunity. “This must have a human rights based approach, where we integrate human rights principles, and corruption is viewed as a human rights issue, not just a crime”, K. Pabel stated. For this very reason, the advisory committee prepared a report that was presented to the council. Its key elements were based upon the common view that there is a strong correlation between corruption, and the enjoyment of basic human rights: studies conducted demonstrated this through many statements from national institutions and stakeholders.

It has been identified that corruption within a country can not only affect individuals and groups of individuals, but it also has a negative impact on society at large, whether that is at a national, or international level, “people’s confidence in their governments and democratic order is undermined”. The first individuals or groups of individuals who suffer from the impact of corruption are generally person with disabilities, women, and children: for this reason, the report calls for the protection of human rights of those groups in every state in order to prevent the violation of their human rights.

Marianna Barbieri

money-1050403_960_720

 

 

The Role of Civil Society in the realisation of the Right to Education

Yesterday OIDEL delivered a joint oral statement during the General Debate Item 2 & 3 of the Human Rights Council. The debate was about certain thematic reports of the OHCHR, we were specially interested on the good practices of civil society to enable human rights (click here to know more)  OIDEL together with other NGOs wanted to warn about the importance of the civil society in the realisation of the Right to Education.

ClZ-7sgXEAU0yPC.jpg large

“Thank you mister president,

I speak on behalf of  OIDEL, Commission Africaine des Promoteurs de la Santé et des Droits de l’homme, Graduate Women International (International Federation of University Women), Istituto Internazionale Maria Ausiliatrice delle Salesiane di Don Bosco (IIMA), International Volunteerism Organization for Women, Education and Development – VIDES and Teresian Association

We really appreciate this report and we think that the obligations of the public authorities towards civil society could not be better defined. OIDEL is convinced that the realization of each right requires at certain level the participation of civil society. As said in the report progress and civic participation go hand in hand. Moreover, the report quoted that “a confident nation gives citizens a say and a role in the development of their country”.

However we are surprised that this list of good practices does not include the right to education, besides certain mention to Human Rights Education. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recognizes the right of the individuals to set up educational institutions. As stated by the Dutch Mission during the negotiation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the prior right for parents to choose the education they consider best for their children is a guarantee that education does not become a State monopoly.[1]

 Moreover, it is clear that the countries that are friendlier with the provision of education through civil society are also countries that have addressed with excellence the challenge of diversity and the accomplishment of civil rights.

The content of this report was the compilation of practical recommendations for the creation and maintenance of a safe and enabling environment for civil society. Although we think that the overall objective was well accomplished the annual report remains incomplete due to the lack of inclusion of practices concerning the provision of the right to education.

We encourage the UN OHCHR to take into consideration the role of civil society in the provision of education due to the good impact it has in the realization of friendly environment for the right to education.

In this regard, we also want to invite the UN OHCHR to review our last report “Freedom of Education Index 2016”. This report shows how the participation of civil society in the provision of education is a cornerstone of democratic societies and a guarantee for minorities in pluralistic societies.

Among the good practices we have identified we can highlight the important role in deprived areas of charter schools in the United States or the subsidized non-government schools in South Africa. The report also shows that the participation of civil society in education is compatible with quality. Among countries with the highest level of freedom of education we find some of the best PISA results; such as the Republic of Korea, the Netherlands and Belgium.

Thank you Mr. President,”

 

Ignasi Grau

[1] GLENDON, Mary Ann, 2001  A World made new. Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Random House (p.159 y 190)

Central America and its Migration Corridors

During a presentation provided by representatives of Central American countries in a United Nations side event on June 15th 2016, the increasing issues and dangers of migration and deportation in these countries were revealed. The shocking factual information announced during the event raised deep concerns for the future well being of the persons living in these countries, and for the countries themselves.

Migration, as explained by the representative, A. Baños, is usually triggered by several situations such as bloody battles, social conflicts, or strong political conflicts – as in the case of Guatemala. During these difficult times, families, or their children, flee to other countries in an attempt to protect themselves, escape the violence, and in hopes of finding a better life elsewhere. Children become the most vulnerable victims of these scenarios as they are forced and pressured into getting involved in drug trafficking, and different gangs. As a consequence, not only do they contribute to the organized crimes within their country, but also put theirs and other persons lives in danger, hence the urge and desperate need to migrate elsewhere.

“Migration is an extremely secretive process”, Baños stated, “not even their close family members are told about it”. The reason for this is because if the individuals attempting to migrate are caught at the borders of their country, for example in Mexico, they are either sent back, or made to pay $7000 by a coyote at the border in order to be allowed to continue through the Mexican migration corridor. This opens doors to a corrupted system, and to an entire business revolved around this secretive activity, as more people are participating in it every year. “If they get caught by police, they have the possibility of paying an additional $7000 to be set free”.

“Unfortunately, this activity doesn’t seem to be stopping soon”, Mr. R. Marquez declared, “more than 400,000 persons migrate from Central America annually”. On July 7th, 2014, the President of Mexico presented a comprehensive program of the border that organizes migratory flows, and attempts to protect citizens’ human rights. However, this shielding of the border became obvious in the increasing number of raids, detentions, and deportation of migrants. According to official data revealed by the representative, in 2015, around 171,000 migrants were detained in Central America, and over 150,000 were deported, he stated, “migration has become more and more invisible to avoid migratory checks. But this figure has increased of about 150% this year.”

Not only do migrants get detained, but the majority also suffers some type of crime of violation of human rights, for example sexual or crime violence. “Out of the 11,000 persons received from Central America in 2015, only 40 received protection from the state, generally, women who have been raped.” Marquez stated, “and only one in three persons who request asylum in Mexico has been recognized.”

The Country representatives and UNHCR recognized this situation as highly urgent, and as the escalation of these figures increases annually, they call for the international community to come together, and act upon this severe issue in order to make it come to an end, and in order to “re-distribute the basic human rights of the people who come from these countries”.

 

Marianna Barbieri

Reunión Grupo Sócrates: “Cohesión Social y Diversidad en la educación”

El pasado 28 de mayo tuvo lugar la reunión anual del Grupo Sócrates. El Grupo Sócrates es un grupo de expertos que se reúne con el objetivo de reflexionar sobre las grandes cuestiones actuales de la educación desde un enfoque de libertades. A raíz de los recientes atentados que perpretados en Europa y la constatación que los sistemas educativos han fracasado en la gestión de sociedades plurales el tema tratado fue: “Cohesión Social y Diversidad en la educación”.

Hubo dos presentaciones principales una de Maria Elósegui, Catedrática en Filosofia del Derecho en la Universidad de Zaragoza y experta del ECRI del Consejo de Europa y otra de J.N. Dumont profesor de filosofía y director del Collège Supérieur de Lyon.

Maria Elósegui señalo que el problema de la cohesión social está muy ligado al currículo educativo. En este sentido hay que reflexionar sobre los valores comunes, y su fundamento filosófico e histórico y en los derechos humanos. Esto implica igualmente una reflexión sobre el rol del estado y especialmente sobre la neutralidad del estado. La neutralidad no puede significar dejar fuera de la escuela ni la diversidad cultural, ni la diversidad religiosa. El tener en cuenta las raíces culturales de los hijos de inmigrantes y las minorías no sólo facilita su integración. La profesora Elósegui señaló la importancia de la importancia de educación en derechos humano realizada dentro de los límites constitucionales de cada país y ponderada adecuadamente por la libertad de pensamiento, ideología, religión y el derecho a los padres a educar a sus hijos.

IMG_3315

J.N. Dumont con un enfoque más francófono trató igualmente el problema de la interpretación de la laicidad del estado en muchos países de Europa. J.N. Dumont entiende que la laicidad significa que el estado no es solidario con ninguna confesión en concreto, escenario que no tiene que corresponder con una neutralización del espacio público necesariamente. Este escenario de neutralización como ya señaló Habermas es fácil de vivir por los ateos, pero no por los fieles de las distintas confesiones. Pero sobretodo, J.N. Dumont señaló el efecto perverso que puede tener este enfoque al intentar resolver el problema de la violencia y el fanatismo a través de la ignorancia y desconocimiento del hecho religioso. Este enfoque obscurantista es tierra fértil para movimientos fanáticos y sectas y dificultan la convivencia entre las distintas confesiones y los sistemas democráticos. Más allá de la crítica al sistema actual J.N. Dumont explicó la importancia de ir hacia un enfoque de hospitalidad y diálogo con las distintas confesiones compartiendo una buena práctica de un colegio católico de Lyon con varias religiones.

Tras la intervención hubo un debate por parte de los otros participantes. A destacar los comentarios de A. Fernandez sobre la dimensión cultural del derecho a la educación, y como su omisión – incluyendo religión e identidad- no sólo conducen a los radicalismos sino también a una vulneración de derechos humanos. Tuvo especial interés por parte de los expertos la experiencia de los acomodamientos razonables en la gestión de ambientes educativos con pluralidad de identidades. ¿Qué son los acomodamientos razonables? Según el TEDH se trata de proteger el pluralismo que se basa en el reconocimiento y el respeto verdadero de la diversidad y del dinamismo de las tradiciones culturales, de las identidades étnicas y culturales, así como de las convicciones religiosas de los ciudadanos en el espacio público y en el ámbito laboral: ello incluye el uso de vestimenta, símbolos religiosos personales, horarios y regímenes alimenticios. (Para saber más). Con el material de esta reunión esperamos realizar un informe que esperamos compartir con vosotros próximamente.

Tras la reunión el Relator Especial por el Derecho a la educación Kishore Singh quiso reunirse con los expertos para discutir el contenido de su próximo informe.

 

Ignasi Grau i Callizo

Del 29 de febrero al 24 de marzo, tendrá lugar la 31° Edición del Consejo de Derechos Humanos en Ginebra.

 

Lunes, primer día de la semana y empezamos todos con nuestra rutina. La verdad es que para mi comienza un mes diferente lleno de aventuras, gente que conocer y mucho por escuchar y aprender. La semana pasada comenzó el Consejo de Derechos Humanos en su 31 edición. “¡Vaya lío en el que te has metido!” me decían todos mis amigos. La verdad es que solo llevo una semana visitando el “Palais de Nations” y viendo a la gente interesantísima que por él se pasea No quepo en mi de la emoción! Me gustaría compartir con ustedes esta experiencia para que como yo, aunque de otra manera, sean participes también.

Pues bien comenzaré hablando de los “Derechos humanos” palabras que todos hemos oído 10.000 veces y aún si pocos saben hablar con propiedad acerca de ellos. Son dos grandes palabras que para muchos como yo inexpertos en la materia suenan a veces muy abstractos y otras muy técnico. Por ejemplo si alguien nos pregunta ¿qué es el Consejo de Derechos Humanos? casi ni yo sabía explicarles con exactitud. Por eso me gustaría en esta entrada del blog ponerles un poco en situación de todo el traqueteo que está ocurriendo en este mes de Marzo en Ginebra.

El Consejo es un órgano intergubernamental del sistema Naciones Unidas compuesto por 47 personas y responsable de la promoción y protección de todos los derechos humanos en el mundo entero.

Cada año se reúnen en estas fechas la comunidad internacional para tratar temas tan importantes como el cambio climático, el derecho fundamental a una vivienda digna, los derechos de los niños, lucha contra la tortura, derecho a la libertad de religión, fórums acerca de las minorías, terrorismo etc. Estos son varios de los temas que hasta ahora he tenido la suerte de escuchar en las conferencias.

Como es tradición el Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas, ¡alto un minuto!, llegado a este punto espero no ser la única que se pregunte ¿quién es el Alto Comisionado y porque ha aparecido de repente? De no ser así, me sentiré la única que tuvo que leerse bien todos los folletos. Para que usted lector no tenga que pasar por la vergüenza que pasé el otro día trabajando se lo explicaré con gusto.

La Oficina del Alto Comisionado para los Derechos Humanos ( ACNUDH) representa el compromiso del mundo frente a los ideales universales de la dignidad humana. La comunidad internacional les ha conferido el mandato exclusivo de promover y proteger todos los derechos humanos. El Alto Comisionado es el principal órgano funcionarial e independiente relativo a derechos de las Naciones Unidas. Las prioridades, los logros y las estrategias que el ACNUDH identifica se recogen en varios informes durante el año dependiendo de la situación global. Durante el Consejo de marzo se presenta un informe que hace balance de la situación de derechos humanos durante el año. Este que me ha tenido loca media semana, contiene material esencial que será objeto de debate a lo largo de todo el mes por eso intentaré hacerles unas rápidas pinceladas del mismo.

En cuanto al Consejo de Derechos Humanos, ¿otro organismo más? Efectivamente queridos lectores esto no ha hecho mas que empezar, pero seré breve y concisa, no vaya a ser que desconecten en los siguientes instantes.

El Consejo de Derechos Humanos es el principal órgano intergubernamental de derechos humanos de las Naciones Unidas. El Consejo es un organismo intergubernamental integrado por 47 estados miembros, con sede nada más y nada menos que en Ginebra. Se reúne como mínimo 10 semanas repartidas en 3 periodos de sesiones pudiendo celebrarse si se diera el caso reuniones extraordinarias.

Una vez ya situados y puestos en contexto, al lío, es decir volvamos al informe mencionado con anterioridad. Dejadme destacaros los temas que se presumen como más importantes ahora mismo: la pena de muerte – reconocida aún en muchos países-, el cambio climático, los efectos del terrorismo– DAESH- en el goce de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales, las medidas coercitivas unilaterales – los embargos que afectan a economías y familias enteras – y los derechos del niño que siempre son los más vulnerables.

El Consejo de Derechos Humanos también fue quien organizó un diálogo en profundidad e interactivo sobre los derechos humanos de los migrantes y un diálogo acerca del estado de las negociaciones sobre la agenda sobre el desarrollo post-2015.

En el último año de conformidad con su mandato el ACNUDH ha instado a los Estados a que promovieran y protegieran los derechos de todo ser humano, no siendo los migrantes una excepción.

Estos grandes movimientos migratorios que están teniendo lugar en el mundo nos recuerdan a día de hoy la importancia de los derechos humanos. La diáspora que vemos desde oriente medio nos muestra como los seres humanos no escatiman esfuerzos para buscar medios de supervivencia, protección y soluciones. Para permitir a las personas vivir en paz, dignidad y seguridad, los Estados y la comunidad internacional tienen que tomarse seriamente los derechos humanos y hacer una evaluación más honesta de los déficits que causan estas crisis.

El ACNUDH, que llegados a este punto ya forma parte de nuestro vocabulario diario ¿verdad?, hace una importante contribución identificando estos déficits. ¿Cómo? Pues procurando erradicar cuadros prolongados de discriminación o violaciones de los derechos humanos incentivando la capacidad de las instituciones públicas para reparar las vulneraciones y prestando asistencia para luchar contra la pobreza de manera incluyente y global.

Espero no haber sido muy pedante, que tengan un buen comienzo de semana.

Y no duden en compartir con nosotros cualquier inquietud sugerente, que a veces no nos atrevemos ni a preguntar por miedo a quedar mal : opiniones, detalles acerca de organismos, educación… ustedes ya me entienden.

 

Ana Vidal

 

 

 

Education : partager le pouvoir avec la société civile

Éducation 2030, le nouveau cadre normatif international qui vient d’être adopté à l’ UNESCO demande aux États de partager le pouvoir dans le domaine éducatif et de mettre en marche une gouvernance participative et des partenariats coordonnés à tous les niveaux et dans tous les secteurs et à défendre le droit de participation de toutes les parties prenantes. 

Le nouveau mot d’ordre est donc la participation. Mais pourquoi l’éducation laisse-t-elle d’être une affaire purement étatique pour s’ouvrir maintenant à la collaboration de tous? Le changement assez radical vient d’un double constat. Le constat de l’échec de l’Etat dans la mise en œuvre d’une éducation inclusive et garantissant la cohésion sociale d’une part et la reconnaissance du travail effectué par la société civile dans la réalisation du droit à l’éducation depuis plus d’un siècle, d’autre part

Mais cette nouvelle donne ne peut pas rester seulement au niveau des bonnes intentions. Elle exige essentiellement deux choses. En premier lieu des actes de la part des Etats et pas seulement de ceux du Sud : une participation de la conception jusqu’à l’exécution des politiques. Ensuite une vraie évaluation des mécanismes de participation intégrant des indicateurs qualitatifs et quantitatifs. Les mécanismes de participation existants sont nettement insuffisants et il faut imaginer des nouveaux qui permettent de jauger réellement l’attitude des pouvoirs publics. L’heure n’est plus à la méfiance, mais à la collaboration.

C’est dans ce contexte que l’OIDEL, conjointement avec la Fondation Novae Terrae, vient de publier un tout nouvel Indice qui permet d’évaluer l’attitude des Etats vis-à-vis de ses partenaires : favorisent-ils, oui ou non la création d’établissements de la société civile ? Ou encore : promeuvent-ils les droits des parents reconnus par les normes internationales ?

coverture_indexfei_web

cliquez ici pour voir le rapport complet

Ce nouvel Indice, qui sera publié régulièrement, couvre 94% de la population mondiale et toutes les régions du monde, offrant ainsi un panorama global de l’état de la situation. Pas moins d’une vingtaine d’experts y ont travaillé. L’Indice place les pays sur une échelle de 0 à 100, non dans le but d’établir un classement, mais pour permettre à chaque État d’évaluer sa politique de façon objective par rapport à un standard mondial des droits de l’homme.

Concluons avec ce mot d’ordre tiré du Libre blanc sur la gouvernance de l’Union européenne : « les politiques ne peuvent être efficaces si elles ne sont pas élaborées, mises en œuvre et appliquées de manière plus participative».

 

Alfred Fernandez

 

Article paru dans la Tribune de Genève le 8 février