CSW 2021 – Decision making

This year the CSW has as its main topic DECISION MAKING.

Its emphasis is on ensuring women’s full and effective participation and decision making in public life as well as the elimination of violence. Thus ensuring human rights. The positive effect which equal participation of women have on the whole of society is hardly mentioned.

Last year the IAW Commission on Democracy formulated its recommendations on this issue in its annual Report. The IAW Action Plan 2021-2123 included those in its objectives.

We recommend to insist on implementation of International Treaties to start with CEDAW, the implementation of National laws and the commitments made such as UN agreed conclusions.

This includes equal participation of women and men in decision making in all areas and in all activities. It also includes to ensure that gendermainstreaming is understood by both men and women and henceforth implemented.

We also advise to emphasise that the participation of women is not only a human right but has positive effects on the whole of society. Stronger : it is often essential for the solution of problems.

Recently I studied the book “The United Nations and the Advancement of Women 1945-1995”.

This 690 page book list all activities, UN resolutions, recommendations and documents on this issue.

In all those documents women’s unequal situation, women’s problems including violence are described as shortcomings in human rights. Solutions are formulated in long lists of commitments in UN agreed conclusions.

The emphasis on women as victims is clear, victims to be rescued by ….. you guess it.

Nowhere (!!) in all those documents is mentioned the positive effect the participation of women have on the whole of sosiety, leave alone the essential participation of women to solve conflicts.

UN Resolution 1325 on Women Peace and Security was an exception in 2005. But even then participation in conflict resolution was presented as a human right, not as essential.

The Council of Europe seminar we organised in 2018 was called “Women’s contribution to world Peace by implementing UNSC Resolution 1325 Women, Peace and Security”

However in 2021 the website of Wikipedia states “The resolution acknowledged the disproportionate and unique impact of armed conflict on women and girls. It calls for the adoption of a gender perspective to consider the special needs of women and girls during conflict, repatriation and resettlement, rehabilitation, reintegration, and post-conflict reconstruction” Again women as victims.

It reminds me of my first endeavour with women’s rights 1982-1996 on UN Habitat. We worked with five  International Women NGO’s to include women’s issues into the UN Habitat Strategies. UN started to describe women as the “poorest of the poor” in need of support in competition with other priorities. We stated “in spite of women as the poorest of the poor, it are women to keep societies together” and we supported and proved this with case studies over the years.

Result : The UN Habitat Strategies included as one of its three major fundamental strategies “the contribution of women is essential to the solution of problems”. This is what we need again. This recognition.

Rita Marque Mbatha showed us in 2016 another example how women keep their society together.

Conclusion We advocate that Governments at the CSW recognise the essential contribution women have in keeping societies together and that the equal participation of women and men in decision making in all areas and all activities, is not only a human right but a essential condition for a healthy society particularly in problem solving and conflict resolution. This should be included in the CSW agreed concluisions 2021.

The post CSW 2021 – Decision making- recommendations by IAW Commission on Democracy appeared first on International Alliance of Women.

This seminar was organised by the INGO Conference of the Council of Europe in collaboration with other NGO’s.

The most interesting panel was on “Do activists, changemakers and human rights defenders need NGOs?”.

Civil society consists of formal NGO’s and non-formal groups. Non-formal groups consist of social movements (Me Too) and street protests people.

Main problems world wide:

1. Demographic change with more older and less young persons
2. Migration
3. Climate change

Issues:

1. Backlash against NGOs is increasing
2. General distrust widespread also against and between NGO’s
3. Digitalisation
4. Social media
5. On-line activism with positive and negative effects
6. Populism: “we represent the population of the grassroots and we do not need NGO’s”
7. New – conservative – civil societies against liberal democracy becoming active and even mainstream; some with a clear strategy and a lot of money.
8. Advocacy organisations getting more difficulties such as hate speech, safety, funding, relational,
9. Funding often linked to regulations which might interfere with independence.
10. Some NGOrganisations when receiving funding – are losing their charity status through regulations and have to pay taxes.

Problems such as SOROS in Hungary and INGOs in Russia

10. Cooperation with governments and politicians requires access, which is getting limited.

Panel on Expectations – Future Needs chaired by Sandra Pernar, Open Government Partnership and Anna Rurka, Chair INGO Conference and others :

1. NGOs are not the executors of political decisions
2. NGOs are partners of Governments
3. NGOs have power
4. Elections are not enough to be involved in the debates and decisions
5. Consent of those governed is to be given continuously
6. Governments, UN, EU, CoE have the legal obligation to involve NGO’s

INGOs have consultative / participatory status in which this is laid down

1. The CoM (Committee of Ministers) of the CoE (Council of Europe) has formulated the guidelines of civil / NGOparticpation
2. There is also a clear definition of “political participation” (Anna Rurka)
3. NGO’s are not flexible enough. The world is changing and we have to adapt our working methods, but we will still be here in 2020!

Contribution of Netherlands Participants

Harry Rogge Representing European Association of Geographers EUROGEO

• Emphasised the need for better education in all those fields.

Focus should then be on the European values we share.

Stressing the positive aspect of European collaboration

• He also emphasised accountability through communication
• As an example of arranging better communication he, together with others, has set up meetings between the INGO representatives and Government representatives (parliamentarians and elected local authorities) in order to communicate, arrange the exchange of ideas and in doing so getting a grip of who is doing what?

Anje Wiersinga, representing International Alliance of Women and Vrouwenbelangen

• On Education we can learn from the campaigns since the late 19th century on Human Rights from their succeses and from theid failures; such as those of the Labor movement, the Voting Rights movement, the Women’s rights movement, the Black Civil Rights Movement.
• NGO’s are needed by Grassroots groups to bring their wishes and demands to the decision-taking level. This was agreed by all present
• Governments and politicians also need NGOs to bring those wishes, demands and priorities of civic society to their attention and to be included in their policies

As an example she mentioned the invitation of Syrian and Cypriotic women as speakers to an event for parliamentarians at the CoE in Strasbourg.

• Next to attention to the rights of minorities there is a need to implement the rights of the majority – women.

By Harry Rogge and Anje Wiersinga, both accredited members of INGO Conference at the Council of Europe.

5 March 2020

The post From the Past to the Future: A Living Space for a Living Democracy appeared first on International Alliance of Women.