Flickr/Leonardo Veras (CC BY 2.0)

Análisis Especiales

AWID es un organización feminista internacional de membresía, que brinda apoyo a los movimientos que trabajan para lograr la justicia de género y los derechos de las mujeres en todo el mundo.

Protección de la familia

El contexto

Esta sección de análisis especial ofrece un análisis feminista crítico y acceso a los recursos clave relacionados con la «protección de la familia» en los espacios internacionales de derechos humanos.

Durante los últimos años, venimos observando una nueva y preocupante tendencia en el ámbito internacional de derechos humanos, donde se están empleando discursos sobre la «protección de la familia» para defender violaciones cometidas contra miembros de la familia, de modo de reforzar y justificar la impunidad y para coartar la igualdad de derechos en el seno de la familia y la vida familiar. 

La campaña para «proteger a la familia» es impulsada por proyectos conservadores que tienen como fin imponer interpretaciones «tradicionales» y patriarcales de familia; quitando los derechos de las manos de sus miembros para ponerlos en las de la institución «familia».

Los proyectos de «protección de la familia» tienen su origen en los siguientes fenómenos:

  • el auge del tradicionalismo,
  • el auge del conservadurismo cultural, social y religioso, y
  • posturas hostiles a los derechos humanos de las mujeres, los derechos sexuales, los derechos de las niñas y los niños y los derechos de las personas con identidades de género y orientaciones sexuales no normativas.  

Desde 2014 un grupo de estados opera como bloque en espacios de derechos humanos, bajo el nombre «Group of Friends of the Family» [Grupo de amigos de la familia], y a partir de entonces se han aprobado resoluciones sobre la «Protección de la familia» todos los años.

Esta agenda se ha extendido más allá del Consejo de Derechos Humanos (HRC, por sus siglas en inglés).  Hemos visto cómo el lenguaje regresivo sobre «la familia» se ha introducido en la Comisión de la Condición Jurídica y Social de las Mujeres (CSW, por sus siglas en inglés), y hemos asistido a intentos por incluir este lenguaje en las negociaciones sobre los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible.


Nuestro enfoque

AWID trabaja con asociadxs y aliadxs para resistir conjuntamente las agendas regresivas de «Protección de la familia» y otras, y para defender la universalidad de los derechos humanos.

En respuesta a la creciente influencia de actores regresivos en los espacios de derechos humanos, AWID se ha unido con aliadxs para formar el Observatorio de la Universalidad de los Derechos (OURs, por sus siglas en inglés).  OURs es un proyecto colaborativo que monitorea, analiza y comparte información sobre iniciativas anti-derechos tales como la «Protección de la familia».

Derechos en Riesgo, el primer informe de OURs, traza un mapa de los actores que conforman el cabildeo global anti-derechos e identifica sus discursos y estrategias principales, señalando los efectos que estos discursos y estrategias están teniendo sobre nuestros derechos humanos.

El informe expone a la «Protección de la familia» como una agenda que ha promovido la colaboración entre una amplia gama de actores regresivos en las Naciones Unidas. La describe como un marco estratégico que aloja «múltiples posiciones patriarcales y anti-derechos, cuyo marco, a su vez, apunta a justificar e institucionalizar estas posiciones».

Contenido relacionado

Snippet - WITM About the survey - AR

عن الاستطلاع

  • عالمي ومتنوع يعكس وقائع التمويل للتنظيم النسوي على المستوى العالمي ومقسّم حسب المناطق
  • مقسم حسب النطاق يضع أصوات، وجهات النظر والتجارب المعاشة للحركات النسوية في المركز ويسلط الضوء على ثروتها، شجاعتها وتنوّعها، كل واحدة في نطاقها
  • مشترك: تم تطوير وتجربة الاستطلاع باستشارة أعضاء/ عضوات جمعية حقوق المرأة في التنمية والشركاء/ الشريكات في الحركة
  • تكميلي يساهم ويعزّز الأدلة المتواجدة عن وضع التمويل للحركات النسوية والنسائية وحركات العدالة الجندرية من النشطاء/ الناشطات، الممولين/ات النسويين/ات والحلفاء/ الحليفا
  • متعدد اللغات متاح باللغة العربية، الانجليزية، الفرنسية، البرتغالية، الروسية والاسبانية
  • إعطاء الأولوية للخصوصية والأمان نحن ملتزمون/ات بالحفاظ على سرية وسلامة بياناتك. اقرأ/ي سياسة الخصوصية الخاصة بنا لمعرفة المزيد حول التدابير التي نتخذها لضمان حماية معلوماتك.
  • متاح متاح لأشخاص مع درجات سمع، حركة، رؤية، وقدرات فكرية مختلفة، ويحتاج تقريباً 30 دقيقة لإتمامه.
  • قابل للنسخ يمكن للحركات نسخ الاستطلاع لما يتناسب مع نطاقاتها. ستكون أدوات الاستطلاع متاحة لإجراء أبحاث إضافية ومناصرة مشتركة.

Key impacts on the international human rights system

Anti-rights actors have had a substantive impact on our human rights framework and the progressive interpretation of human rights standards, especially rights related to gender and sexuality.

When it comes to the impact of conservative actors in international policy spaces, the overall picture today is of stasis and regressions.


We have witnessed the watering down of existing agreements and commitment; deadlock in negotiations; sustained undermining of UN agencies, treaty review bodies and Special Procedures; and success in pushing through regressive language in international human rights documents.

Commission on the Status of Women (CSW)

The CSW, held annually in March, has long been one of the most contested sites in the UN system. In March 2015, conservative efforts set the tone before events or negotiations even began; the outcome document of the Commission was a weak Declaration negotiated before any women’s rights activists even arrived on the ground.

At 2016’s CSW, the new Youth Caucus was infiltrated by large numbers of vocal anti-abortion and anti-SRHR actors, who shouted down progressive youth organizations. Again, intensive negotiations resulted in a lacklustre text, which included regressive language on ‘the family.’

Precisely when addressing women’s human rights is of urgent importance, the CSW has been rendered a depoliticized and weakened space. Using it to advance rights has become harder and harder since progressives’ energy is taken up trying to hold the ground against conservative backlash.

Human Rights Council (HRC)

As the intergovernmental body responsible for the promotion and protection of human rights around the globe, the HRC is a key entry point for conservative actors. In recent years, this mechanism has been the scene for a number of damaging anti-human rights moves.

In conversation with other anti-rights actors, one strategy of conservative states, and blocs of states, is to aggressively negotiate out positive language and to introduce hostile amendments to resolutions, most often resolutions focusing on rights related to gender and sexuality.

To take one example, during the June 2016 session of the HRC, opposition was mounted towards a resolution on discrimination against women by the member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and allies. During contentious negotiations, multiple provisions were removed, including women’s and girls’ right to have control over their sexuality, sexual and reproductive health, and reproductive rights; and the need to repeal laws which perpetuate the patriarchal oppression of women and girls in families, and those criminalizing adultery or pardoning marital rape.

The HRC has also been the site of pernicious conservative initiatives to co-opt human rights norms and enact conservative “human rights” language, such as that of the Russia-led “traditional values” resolutions, and more recently the “Protection of the Family” agenda.

Human Rights Committee

In 2015, moving their sights to another front, a number of religious right organizations began to target the Human Rights Committee, the treaty monitoring body for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), a pivotal human rights instrument.

Anti-human rights groups mobilized in hopes of cementing their anti-abortion rhetoric into the treaty.

When the Committee announced it was drafting a new authoritative interpretation of the right to life, over 30 conservative non-state actors sent in written submissions, advocating their misleading discourse on ‘right to life’ - that life begins at conception and that abortion is a violation of the right - be incorporated in the Committee’s interpretation of article 6.

Conservative groups targeting the Human Rights Committee was a shift considering that historically anti-human rights actors have repeatedly attempted to undermine and invalidate the essential work of the treaty monitoring bodies, including the Human Rights Committee.

SDG negotiations and Agenda 2030

Anti-human rights actors were involved in lobbying towards the development of the new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, focusing again on rights relating to gender and sexuality. These efforts had limited traction in their attempts to embed regressive language in Agenda 2030.

However, after successfully pushing back against progressive language in the final text, conservative actors then pivoted to another strategy. In an attempt to evade state accountability and undermine the universality of rights, several states have repeatedly made reservations to the Goals.

On behalf of the African Group, Senegal claimed that African states would only “implement the goals in line with the cultural and religious values of its countries.”

The Holy See also made a number of reservations, stating it was “confident that the related pledge ‘no one will be left behind’ would be read” as meaning “the right to life of the person, from conception until natural death.”

Saudi Arabia went one step further, declaring that the country would not follow any international rules relating to the SDGs that reference sexual orientation or gender identity, describing them as running “counter to Islamic law.”

General Assembly (GA)

Anti-rights actors have made increasing headway at the UN General Assembly (GA).  Most recently, during the 71st session in 2016, the GA was the scene of feverish anti-rights organizing in opposition to the new mandate created by the Human Rights Council resolution on sexual orientation and gender identity in June 2016: the Independent Expert on SOGI. Four separate attempts were made to undercut the mandate in GA spaces.

One approach was to introduce a hostile resolution at the Third Committee[1], led by the African Group, which in essence aimed to indefinitely defer the new mandate. While this approach was not successful, such an attempt in the GA to retroactively block the creation of a mandate brought forward by the Human Rights Council represented a new and troubling tactic - anti-right actors are now working to directly undermine the HRC’s authority respective to the General Assembly.

Another approach targeted the Fifth Committee (responsible for administration and budgetary matters) as an entry point to attack the mandate. In an unprecedented move a number of States attempted (again, unsuccessfully) to block the funding of UN human rights experts, including the new IE on SOGI[2],.

While these multiple efforts were unsuccessful in blocking the creation and continuation of the new mandate, the significant support they received, the novel strategizing employed, and the strong alliances built along regional lines through negotiations point to difficulties ahead.


[1] The Third Committee of the GA deals with agenda items relating to a range of social, humanitarian affairs, and human rights issues.  Each year it discusses and issues resolutions on issues including the advancement of women, the protection of children, family, and youth.

[2] While UN Special Procedures experts (i.e. Special Rapporteurs, Working Group members and Independent Experts) work pro bono, some funds are generally allocated to facilitate country visits on the invitation of the national government, and support staff.

 


Other Chapters

Read the full report

Body

Stella Mukasa

Stella began her career at the Ministry of Gender and Community Development in Uganda engaging with policymakers for law reform, including the 1995 Ugandan Constitution, which established some of the most progressive reforms for women in the region.

She is revered throughout the region for her tireless efforts to create and enforce gender-responsive laws and policies. She played a key role in drafting Uganda’s Domestic Violence Act and in mobilizing support for gender-responsive constitutions in both Uganda and in Rwanda.

Through her work with International Center for Research on Women (ICRW), she worked on violence against children, and worked to strengthen the capacities of grassroots organizations addressing gender-based violence. She was a lecturer on gender rights and the law at Makerere University and served on the boards of Akina Mama wa Afrika, ActionAid International Uganda and the Open Society Initiative for Eastern Africa.


 

Stella Mukasa, Uganda

Snippet FEA collaborator and allies Photo 4 (ES)

La foto muestra a Sopo hablando en un evento público en el interior. Sostiene el micrófono mientras lee sus notas y está sentada en una silla entre otras tres personas que son oradores o moderadores.

Qual é o objetivo do inquérito WITM?

O objetivo principal do inquérito WITM é chamar a atenção para o estado financeiro dos diversos movimentos feministas, de direitos das mulheres, de justiça de género, de LBTQI+ e de aliados globalmente, e com base nisto, fortalecer ainda mais o argumento para transferir mais recursos de melhor qualidade e poder para os movimentos feministas.

Sala de prensa

AWID en los medios

Compilación de noticias sobre la organización y/o el trabajo de AWID


 

 


Notas de prensa

Notas de prensa, dosieres y kits


 

Kits de social media

Contacto para medios

Email de contacto

+1 416 594 3773

Juana Ramírez Santiago

Juana fue una de las fundadoras y era actualmente integrante de la junta directiva de la Red de Mujeres Ixiles de Nebaj, una organización por los derechos de las mujeres indígenas que es parte de la Iniciativa Mesoamericana de Mujeres Defensoras de Derechos Humanos (IM-Defensoras).

También era partera y madre de siete hijxs. Había recibido amenazas de muerte que fueron denunciadas ante la Fiscalía. Juana es la tercera defensora de derechos humanos indígena asesinada en el área durante 2018. El Ombudsman de Guatemala informa que un total de 20 defensorxs de derechos humanos fueron asesinadxs este año en el país.

Juana Ramírez Santiago fue baleada de muerte por atacantes desconocidos mientras cruzaba un puente en Nebak, Quiché, Guatemala. Están en curso las investigaciones para identificar a los perpetradores. 


 

Juana Ramírez Santiago, Guatemala

Snippet FEA different lines of work S4 (FR)

Lignes de travail :

CONTRE

É possível existir várias respostas para o inquérito WITM em nome de um grupo específico?

Não, solicitamos apenas um inquérito completo por grupo.

Here are your report and infographics: Toward a feminist funding ecosystem

Ana M. Tallada Iglesia

Ana était un ardente défenseure des droits des femmes et travaillait avec un large éventail de femmes au sein d’organisations de terrain ainsi que dans le secteur privé.

Elle croyait en la construction de ponts entre les secteurs. Ana était membre du Réseau national de promotion de la femme (RNPM) et participait activement à l'élaboration de nombreux programmes sociaux traitant de questions telles que la santé et les droits sexuels et reproductifs.


 

Ana M. Tallada Iglesia, Peru

Snippet FEA Wage Parity (EN)

Illustration of two a pair of white-skinned people in glasses, to the left in the background is a mand and to the right at the forefront is a woman. The background is turquoise.

WAGE PARITY

Reason to join 2

Find and create connections. There are over 9,000 AWID members, all working to address complementary, interconnected issues. This diversity supports the sustainability of feminist movements and actors.