Flickr/Leonardo Veras (CC BY 2.0)

Special Focus

AWID is an international, feminist, membership organisation committed to achieving gender equality, sustainable development and women’s human rights

Protection of the Family

The Issue

Over the past few years, a troubling new trend at the international human rights level is being observed, where discourses on ‘protecting the family’ are being employed to defend violations committed against family members, to bolster and justify impunity, and to restrict equal rights within and to family life.

The campaign to "Protect the Family" is driven by ultra-conservative efforts to impose "traditional" and patriarchal interpretations of the family, and to move rights out of the hands of family members and into the institution of ‘the family’.

“Protection of the Family” efforts stem from:

  • rising traditionalism,
  • rising cultural, social and religious conservatism and
  • sentiment hostile to women’s human rights, sexual rights, child rights and the rights of persons with non-normative gender identities and sexual orientations.

Since 2014, a group of states have been operating as a bloc in human rights spaces under the name “Group of Friends of the Family”, and resolutions on “Protection of the Family” have been successfully passed every year since 2014.

This agenda has spread beyond the Human Rights Council. We have seen regressive language on “the family” being introduced at the Commission on the Status of Women, and attempts made to introduce it in negotiations on the Sustainable Development Goals.


Our Approach

AWID works with partners and allies to jointly resist “Protection of the Family” and other regressive agendas, and to uphold the universality of human rights.

In response to the increased influence of regressive actors in human rights spaces, AWID joined allies to form the Observatory on the Universality of Rights (OURs).  OURs is a collaborative project that monitors, analyzes, and shares information on anti-rights initiatives like  “Protection of the Family”.

Rights at Risk, the first OURs report, charts a map of the actors making up the global anti-rights lobby, identifies their key discourses and strategies, and the effect they are having on our human rights.   

The report outlines “Protection of the Family” as an agenda that has fostered collaboration across a broad range of regressive actors at the UN.  It describes it as: “a strategic framework that houses “multiple patriarchal and anti-rights positions, where the framework, in turn, aims to justify and institutionalize these positions.”

 

Related Content

Notre vision : La justice économique dans un monde féministe

En tant que féministes luttant pour la justice de genre, la paix, la justice économique, sociale et environnementale, nous savons qu'il n'existe pas de recette miracle, mais plutôt un éventail de possibilités qui peuvent faire changer les choses, et qui les font changer.


Cet éventail d’options est aussi diversifié que nos mouvements et les communautés dans lesquelles nous vivons et nous luttons.

Avant de vous présenter quelques-unes de ces propositions féministes pour un autre monde, voici les principes qui encadrent nos propositions :

1. Un développement autodéterminé, du local au global

Nous croyons qu'il ne doit pas y avoir un seul modèle pour tous, et que chacun-e doit avoir le droit de revendiquer et de contribuer à la construction d'un autre monde possible, comme le formule le slogan du Forum social mondial.

Cela inclut le droit de participer à la gouvernance démocratique et d'influer sur son avenir, politiquement, économiquement, socialement et culturellement.

L'autodétermination économique permet aux peuples de prendre le contrôle de leurs ressources naturelles et d'utiliser ces ressources pour atteindre leurs propres objectifs ou pour un usage collectif. En outre, le pouvoir d’agir des femmes dans la sphère économique est fondamental pour atténuer le caractère souvent cyclique de la pauvreté, le déni de l'éducation, de la sécurité et de la sûreté.

2. Les droits, l'égalité réelle et la justice au cœur de l'économie

Le principe de l'égalité réelle est énoncé dans la Convention sur l'élimination de toutes les formes de discrimination à l'égard des femmes (CEDAW) et d'autres instruments internationaux relatifs aux droits humains. Ce principe est fondamental pour le développement et la transformation vers une économie juste, car il affirme que tous les êtres humains naissent libres et égaux.

La non-discrimination fait partie intégrante du principe d'égalité, qui veille à ce que personne ne soit privé de ses droits en raison de facteurs tels que la race, le sexe, la langue, la religion, l'orientation sexuelle, l'identité sexuelle, une opinion politique ou autre, l’origine nationale ou sociale, la fortune ou la naissance.

La dignité inhérente à toute personne sans distinction doit être maintenue et respectée. Alors que les États doivent veiller à l'utilisation d’un maximum de ressources disponibles pour la réalisation des droits humains, le fait d’exiger ces droits et la dignité est un enjeu clé pour la lutte de la société civile et la mobilisation populaire.

3. Une redistribution juste pour tous et toutes, sans monopolisation ou accaparement (le principe d’anti-avidité)

Ce principe, mis en œuvre par les efforts coordonnés visant à transformer les institutions injustes, soutient le rétablissement de l’équilibre entre la « participation » (entrées) et la « distribution » (sorties), lorsque celui-ci est rompu.

Il permet de poser des limites à l'accumulation monopolistique de capital et d'autres abus liés à la propriété. Ce concept est fondé sur un modèle économique qui repose sur l'équité et la justice.

4. La solidarité féministe et inter-mouvements est fondamentale

Pour changer les choses, nous avons besoin de réseaux féministes solides et diversifiés. Nous avons besoin de mouvements qui renforcent la solidarité du niveau personnel au niveau politique, du niveau local au niveau global, et inversement.
 
Construire le pouvoir collectif grâce aux mouvements permet de convertir la lutte pour les droits humains, l'égalité et la justice en une force politique pour le changement qui ne peut être ignorée.

 « Seuls les mouvements sont en mesure de créer des changements durables à des niveaux que la politique et les lois seules ne permettraient pas d’atteindre. »

 


Pour en savoir plus sur ce sujet, consulter S. Batliwala, 2012 Changer leur monde. Mouvements féministes, concepts et pratiques.


Voir également

Le projet

5 menaces principales

Snippet - CSW69 - Feminist Solidarity Space - ES

Espacio de solidaridad feminista

✉️ Requiere inscripción previa para grandes grupos. Entrada libre para grupos reducidos. Reserven aquí

📅Martes 11 de marzo de 2025
🕒 de 12:00 a 02:00 p.m. y de 04:00 a 06:00 p.m., EST
🏢 
Chef's Kitchen Loft with Terrace, 216 East 45th St 13th Floor New York

Organiza: AWID

Body

Snippet FEA Georgia's minimum wage (EN)

Georgia's minimum wage is in the bottom percent of all countries in the world. This reality affects mostly women.

The country not only has a significant gender pay gap, but women also work longer, more unregulated hours before going home to take care of housework and their families. There is no maternity pay, no wage increase for overtime work, no unemployment insurance, and no pay for sick leave or other social protection. Pressured by Western organizations, Georgian oligarchic political parties have been implementing reforms that are destroying the welfare state, increasing austerity measures, and worsening worker exploitation - all for the benefits of big corporations which are applauding the country for its “ease of doing business”. Mass media, coerced by private and corporate interests, either remain silent or biased on these issues. Union organizing remains one of the very few options to fight for basic human rights, and for holding the State and corporations accountable in the face of daily, pervasive violations and persecutions, especially against women.

Sources: Minimum-Wage and Interview with Sopo Japaridze to OpenDemocracy

Roxana Reyes Rivas

Roxana Reyes Rivas, filósofa, feminista, lesbiana, poeta, política y activista por los derechos humanos de las mujeres y las personas LGBTI en Costa Rica. Dueña de una pluma afilada y un humor agudo, con la risa a flor de piel. Nació en 1960 y creció en San Ramón de Alajuela, cuando era una zona rural, y su vida entera rompería con los mandatos de lo que significaba ser mujer. 

Desde El Reguero (grupo de lesbianas en Costa Rica) organizó festivales lésbicos por más de 10 años, espacios lúdico-formativos de encuentro en momentos donde el gobierno y la sociedad costarricense perseguía y criminalizaba la existencia lésbica. Para cientos de mujeres los festivales lésbicos eran el único lugar donde podían ser ellas mismas y encontrarse con otras como ellas.

Roxana decía que fundar partidos políticos era uno de sus pasatiempos. “Es importante que en Costa Rica la gente entienda que hay otras formas de hacer política, que muchos temas es necesario resolverlos colectivamente”. Fue una de lxs fundadores de los partidos Nueva Liga Feminista y VAMOS, un partido centrado en los derechos humanos.  

“El oficio de la filosofía es meter la puya, ayudar a que la gente empiece a preguntarse cosas. La filósofa que no irrita a nadie, no está haciendo bien su trabajo”. Durante 30 años, Roxana fue profesora de filosofía en universidades públicas costarricenses. De su mano generaciones enteras de estudiantes reflexionaron sobre los dilemas éticos en la ciencia y la tecnología. 

La herramienta favorita de Roxana era el humor, ella creó el premio del Chiverre Incandescente, un reconocimiento a la estupidez que otorgaba vía redes sociales a diferentes figuras públicas, ridiculizando sus exabruptos y afirmaciones anti-derechos.

Un cáncer agresivo se llevó a Roxana a fines del 2019, antes de que alcanzara a publicar la compilación de sus poemas, un último regalo de la mente creativa de una feminista que siempre levantó la voz para denunciar la injusticia. 

Alternative framework for economic governance

Context

The current global economic crisis provides stark evidence that the economic policies of the last 3 decades have not been working.

The devastation that the crisis has wrought on the most vulnerable households in the Global North and Global South is a reminder that the formulation of economic policy and the realization of human rights (economic, social, political, civil and cultural) have for too long been divorced from one another. Economic policy and human rights do not have to be opposing forces, but can exist symbiotically.

Macroeconomic policies affect the operation of the economy as a whole, shaping the availability and distribution of resources. Within this context, fiscal and monetary policies are key.

Definition

  • Fiscal policy refers to both public revenue and public expenditure, and the relationships between them as expressed in the government budget.
  • Monetary policy includes policies on interest and exchange rates and the money supply, as well as the regulation of the financial sector.
  • Macroeconomic policies are implemented using instruments such as taxation, government spending, and control over the supply of money and credit.

These policies affect key prices such as interest and exchange rates that directly influence, among other things, the level of employment, access to affordable credit, and the housing market.

Applying a human rights framework to macroeconomic policy allows States to better comply with their obligation to respect, protect, and fulfill economic and social rights. Human rights are internationally agreed-upon universal standards. These legal norms are articulated in United Nations treaties including, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

Article 1 of the UDHR states that, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”

Although the UDHR was written about six decades ago its relevance is enduring. Many of the ideas address concerns and critical issues that people continue to face globally. Issues regarding inhuman punishment (Art. 5), discrimination (Art. 7), property ownership (Art. 17), equal pay for equal work (Art. 23/2), and access to education (Art. 26/1) are pertinent matters in countries South and North of the equator.

More specifically, States have an obligation under international law to respect, protect and fulfill human rights, including the economic and social rights of people within their jurisdiction. This is particularly relevant now given the financial crisis. In the U.S., regulation is skewed in favor of certain interests. The failure to extend government’s supervisory role in the context of social and economic change is a failure with regard to the obligation to protect human rights.

Feminist perspective

States should abide by key human rights principles to achieve economic and social rights. Some of the principles have potentially important implications for governance of financial institutions and markets, yet these possibilities have been underexplored.

Economic and social rights have a concrete institutional and legal grounding. Global declarations, international treaties, covenants, and, in a number of cases, national constitutions have incorporated aspects of the economic and social rights framework—providing an institutional infrastructure in national and international law.

Some have suggested that a consideration of global justice may not be a useful pursuit because of the institutional complexities involved. However, this does not get around that fact that global institutions already have an impact on social justice, both positive and negative.

It is useful to tease out the implications that elements of alternative frameworks have for economic governance, specifically those supported by existing institutions. Economic and social rights represent one such concrete framework. The framework is an evolving one, and ongoing discussion and deliberation is necessary to address underdeveloped areas and potential deficiencies.


Learn more about this proposition

This section is based on CWGL’s blog “Applying a Human Rights Framework to Macroeconomic Policies” (2012).

Part of our series of


  Feminist Propositions for a Just Economy

Snippet - Resources to rally - ES

Recursos para movilizarnos durante la CSW69

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.

Dorothy Masuka

“Je n’avais pas prévu d’être chanteuse; c’est le chant qui avait prévu de m’habiter”  - Dorothy Masuka (interview avec Mail & Guardian)

Dorothy Masuka, née en 1935 à Bulawayo (alors en Rhodésie du Sud, aujourd’hui le Zimbabwe), a grandi en Afrique du Sud. Elle est devenue une auteure, compositrice, chanteuse de jazz et activiste renommée, et fervente partisane de la lutte contre l’apartheid. Qualifiée d’“architecte du discours de la musique populaire de libération africaine”, Dorothy a souvent chanté la politique dans des langues africaines autochtones et tout au long de son oeuvre, et s’est opposée aux politiques racistes du gouvernement sud-africain. 

L’une de ses chansons, intitulée "Dr Malan" (du nom de l'homme politique pro-apartheid D.F. Malan) a été censurée. Elle a poursuivi avec l’enregistrement de "Lumumba" (1961), une chanson sur l'assassinat du leader anticolonialiste Patrice Lumumba. Le travail et l'activisme de Dorothy ont alors attiré l'attention de la section spéciale de la police sud-africaine, ce qui la contraignit à un exil politique qui s’étendit sur plus de 3 décennies. Tout au long de cette période, elle travailla avec des groupes pro-indépendantistes, dont le Congrès national africain. En 1992, alors que l'apartheid commençait à s'effondrer et que Nelson Mandela fut libéré de prison, elle retourna en Afrique du Sud. 

Parmi ses autres œuvres, on peut citer sa première chanson, enregistrée en 1953 et intitulée "Hamba Notsokolo", qui fut un tube des années 1950 et un grand classique. Elle composa également "El Yow Phata Phata", une chanson adaptée par Miriam Makeba qui contribua à offrir une popularité internationale à "Pata, Pata"

Ancrés dans la résistance, la musique et l’activisme de Dorothy étaient entrelacés et laissent un merveilleux héritage inspirant. Elle était également très connue sous le nom de “Auntie Dot”.   

Le 23 février 2019, Dorothy s’est éteinte à Johannesburg à 83 ans des suites d’une maladie.


Regardez l'interview de Dorothy Masuka pour Mail & Guardian (seulement en anglais)

Écoutez sa musique :

Hamba Nontsokolo
El Yow Phata Phata

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

Snippet - Homepage CSW69_FR

AWID à la CSW69 Beijing+30 | #FreezeFascisms

Notre présence collective perturbe les mécanismes d’exclusion des institutions dans ces espaces tout en soutenant les mouvements qui s’organisent autour d’alternatives féministes aux systèmes d’oppression.

Participez aux conversations du 10 au 21 mars 2025 pour, collectivement, faire de la CSW69 un espace de résistance et de solidarité.

En savoir plus

Snippet FEA different lines of work S4 (FR)

Lignes de travail :

CONTRE

Leah Tumbalang

Leah Tumbalang was a Lumad woman of Mindanao in the Philippines. The story of Lumad Indigenous peoples encompasses generations of resistance to large-scale corporate mining, protection of ancestral domains, resources, culture, and the fight for the right to self-determination. 

Leah was a Lumad  leader as well as a leader of Kaugalingong Sistema Igpasasindog to Lumadnong Ogpaan (Kasilo), a Lumad and peasant organization advocating against the arrival of mining corporations in Bukidnon, Mindanao province. She was unwavering in her anti-mining activism, fervently campaigning against the devastating effects of mineral extraction on the environment and Indigenous peoples’ lands. Leah was also an organizer of the Bayan Muna party-list, a member of the leftist political party Makabayan.

For almost a decade, Leah (along with other members of Kasilo) had been receiving threats for co-leading opposition against the deployment of paramilitary groups believed to be supported by mining interests. 

“Being a Lumad leader in their community, she is at the forefront in fighting for their rights to ancestral land and self-determination.” - Kalumbay Regional Lumad Organization

Being at the forefront of resistance also often means being a target of violence and impunity and Leah not only received numerous death threats, but was murdered on 23 August 2019 in Valencia City, Bukidnon. 

According to a Global Witness report, “the Philippines was the worst-affected country in sheer numbers” when it comes to murdered environmental activists in 2018. 


Read the Global Witness report, published July 2019

Find out more about Lumad women in the Philippines and their inter-generational struggle for self-determination
 

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