Nearly fifty years ago, in 1961, Peter Benenson wrote an article, “The Forgotten Prisoners” in the London Observer, in response to the arrest of two Portuguese students for making a toast to freedom in Lisbon. Thousands of people responded to his article, and soon after, Amnesty International was formed. In 1977, Amnesty International won the Nobel Peace Prize for its influential campaign against torture, and is now regarded as the standard setting organization for the global human rights movement as a whole. In addition to serving as the oldest human rights organization amidst more than 350 such organizations today, Amnesty International conducts comprehensive research on an array of human rights issues across the globe and currently has more than 2.8 million members worldwide.

In recognition of this fifty year anniversary, Amnesty International USA is hosting its annual Southern regional conference this weekend in Atlanta, entitled “Shine a Light: Fifty Years of Activism.” Similar conferences are being held across the United States throughout the fall.

Yesterday, September 23, 2010, Mr. Abel Barrera Hernández was publicly announced as the winner of the prestigious Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award for his tireless efforts to protect the rights of peasants and indigenous peoples in Guerrero, Mexico and his commitment to end human rights abuses resulting from military impunity and narco-violence.

A press release from the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights outlines how Mr. Barrera and his colleagues at the Tlachinollan Human Rights Center of the Mountain work under “constant threat to protect the rights of peasants and indigenous peoples against forced disappearances, rape, arbitrary detentions, intimidation, dispossession of lands and illegal interrogations, and to improve their access to healthcare, legal representation and education.”

The award will be presented to Mr. Barrera by Mrs. Robert F. Kennedy in a ceremony in Washington, D.C. in November. Mr. Barrera joins 41 other RFK human rights laureates representing 24 countries. Recipients in recent years include the Coalition of Immokalee Workers from the United States, Dr. Mohammed Ahmed Abdallah from Sudan, and most recently, Magodonga Mahlangu and Women of Zimbabwe Arise.

Mr. Abel Barrera Hernández, right

In July, the United Nations boldly created a UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, or “UN Women” for short. This entity has been given a broad mandate to “promote gender equality, expand opportunity, and tackle discrimination around the globe.” Yesterday, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon appointed a strong leader to head the new organization; former President of Chile, Dr. Michelle Bachelet. While women’s rights advocates are critical of what they see as an insufficient budget for the organization, many are hopeful that under the leadership of Dr. Bachelet, UN Women will be better able to organize global efforts to forward women’s human rights and their crucial role in development. In a great blog in the Huffington Post, Nandini Oomman articulates the advantages of Dr. Bachelet’s qualifications and outlines three steps UN Women should take in the early stages of its work.

On August 23, 2010, the United States State Department submitted its first domestic human rights report to the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC). In 2006, the HRC established the Universal Periodic Review process to assess each U.N. member nation’s adherence to their human rights obligations under international law every four years.

However, in addition to the federally submitted report, a comprehensive shadow report was also published by the U.S. Human Rights Network, a non-governmental human rights organization. The report represents a compilation of 26 independent civil society submissions covering a vast range of human rights issues, and has been endorsed by more than 200 human rights organizations and advocacy groups in the United States. In a statement released by the U.S. Human Rights Network, University of Pennsylvania Law School Professor Sarah Paoletti, Senior Coordinator for the Network’s UPR Project, testifies: “Comparing the State Department report with the Network’s, it is clear that gaps remain in our respective understanding of the issues and the solutions needed to resolve them. We look forward to working with the Administration to narrow that gap in future months.”

The United States’ human rights record is scheduled for review in a series of hearings by the U.N. Human Rights Council on November 5th in Geneva, Switzerland.

Despite recent years of tremendous economic growth, India is facing incredible challenges of how to address the desperate needs of its hungry and poor, as more than 421 million people live in poverty and nearly half of all children under five are underweight. Recent New York Times articles provide excellent coverage on this issue and a closer look at the life and challenges of India’s poor. While elected officials and experts agree on the need to reevaluate India’s failing social safety nets, they disagree on the roles of government and the market in hunger relief programs. The President of the ruling Indian National Congress Party, Sonia Gandhi, is advocating for the creation of a constitutional right to food. But with widespread corruption in the existing food delivery systems, critics are skeptical that a constitutional right and expansion of the current system would solve the practical problems of distribution. Of course, Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly addresses the issue of hunger, stating “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and his family, including food.” It will be fascinating to see how the world’s largest democracy will address perhaps the most complex issue facing our world today- the implementation of human rights ideals in a global reality of mass economic inequality.

Credit: Lynsey Addario for the NYTimes

This week marks the 20th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which was signed into law on July 26, 1990. The ADA prohibits discrimination based on disability, which is defined as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity. In the United States alone, one out of every five people are affected by a disability, which is roughly 54 million Americans. However, since the ADA was enacted into law, significant changes in technology have created new challenges and forms of discrimination for people living with disabilities. For instance, people with disabilities are twice as likely to not have access to the internet or are severely limited to certain online activities. Those who are blind, for example, are often unable to enter passwords and use certain authentication software, barriers that could be overcome with the development and availability of voice recognition technologies.

As we look back at the last twenty years of progress in increasing access and eliminating forms of discrimination based on disability, we must keep the voices and experiences of people with disabilities at the forefront of policy debates to ensure that our laws keep up with changes in technology and that they continue to protect against new forms of discrimination which impede upon peoples’ capacity to engage with their communities and fulfill their chosen life courses.

After a 16-hour debate, and a vote that ended in the wee hours of the morning, Argentina’s Senate passed a bill recognizing same-sex marriages, thus becoming Latin America’s first nation to grant homosexual couples the same rights, protections, and privileges of marriage as heterosexual couples. Less comprehensive measures towards marriage equality have been instituted in other regions of Latin America, such as the legalization of same-sex civil unions in Uruguay and in a small number of states in Brazil and Mexico. And recently last year, Colombia’s Constitutional Court granted equal civil, political, social and economic rights to gay couples, including such protections as inheritance rights and the inclusion of partners in health insurance plans. In Buenos Aires, proponents of the same-sex marriage bill framed the issue in terms of fulfilling the constitutional mandate of equality before the law and ending discrimination towards individuals based solely on their sexual orientation. Opponents, on the other hand, argued that the passage of such a bill would signify a threat to the “existence of the human species.”

Despite the existence of  reasonable objections to gay marriage based on religious belief, I find the argument that a bill granting same-sex couples the right to marry if they so choose will endanger the survival of humanity a bit absurd, if not dangerous in its fear-mongering. Passing legislation that grants homosexual couples equal rights will not magically change the sexual orientation of heterosexuals. The earth is currently the home of 6,830,000,000 human inhabitants; and according to a 2004 UNICEF report, more than 16,000,000 children are without parents, a number which is only increasing with the spread of HIV/AIDS. It doesn’t take a genius to realize that procreation is not an issue for the human race. It seems to me that the larger, more pressing issue for humanity is caring for humanity, and creating a world where all 7 billion of us have an equal chance at healthy, self-determined lives, free of discrimination in all of its forms.

Gay Pride Activists in Buenos Aires (AP Photo)

.

On this day in 1852, the day following the spectacular celebrations of July 4th, the great abolitionist leader Frederick Douglass delivered one of the hallmark speeches of the anti-slavery movement, the Fifth of July speech. The speech is a profound work that weaves together both irony and powerful demands for human liberty. It is often overlooked, however, that Douglass was invited to deliver this address by the Ladies of the Rochester Anti-Slavery Society. In understanding the significance of this speech, it is thus crucial to recognize the interconnectedness among social justice movements and how the long-fought struggles for racial equality and women’s rights were able to transform popular consciousness by drawing upon principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence- namely the existence of inalienable rights and the Right of the People to alter or abolish government if it becomes destructive of securing the rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. While the speech is a most pressing condemnation of the hypocrisy of the United States- in proclaiming freedom and liberty while profiting from the cruel and exploitative practice of slavery- the echo at the conclusion of the speech inspires critical reflection of the Declaration and resounds a call to action to uphold the nation’s most fundamental principles.

“Fellow citizens; above your national, tumultuous joy, I hear the mournful wail of millions, whose chains, heavy and grievous yesterday, are today rendered more intolerable by the jubilee shouts that reach them… To forget them, to pass lightly over their wrongs, and to chime in with the popular theme, would be treason most scandalous and shocking, and would make me a reproach before God and the world. My subject, then, fellow-citizens, is American Slavery…

What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which lie is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciations of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade, and solemnity, are, to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy- a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices, more shocking and bloody, than are the people of these United States, at this very hour.”

Today, June 22nd, marks the Global Day of Solidarity for death row prisoner, Troy Davis. Davis is accused of fatally shooting Mark MacPhail in 1989. However, after serving more than 18 years on death row, Davis continues to assert his innocence, and serious questions concerning the fairness of his trial have sparked international concern in the human rights community: there was no physical evidence presented in Troy Davis’ trial, the weapon used in the crime was never found, and the case against him rests entirely on witness testimony, even though seven of the nine witnesses have recanted or contradicted their testimony and have admitted they were coerced by police.

As part of its Freedom School in Savannah, Georgia held this past week, representatives from Amnesty International USA and Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty have held educational programs around universal human rights and the death penalty, and the application of capital punishment here in the United States. The Global Day of Solidarity, which will include vigils around the world, is being organized to raise consciousness surrounding Troy Davis’ case as the Georgia Federal District Court begins reviewing new evidence, as ruled last August by the U.S. Supreme Court. Human rights groups will be holding a candlelight vigil in Savannah and at the Georgia State Capitol in Atlanta, and along with the NAACP, will be holding hours of prayer for both Troy Davis and the family of Mark MacPhail.

Vigil Participants Hold Photos of Troy Davis

On May 29, President Bingu Wa Mutharika of Malawi pardoned Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza, who were sentenced to 14 years of hard labor for homosexuality. The couple was arrested in December, a day after celebrating their engagement. Since the arrest, Malawi has faced international criticism for their criminalization and harsh punishment of individuals based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. Celebrity advocates such as Madonna are publicly celebrating the release of the two men, yet concerns still remain for their safety and the possibility of a backlash of homophobia-related hate crimes in the country. While it is clear that intense international pressure helped to bring about the pardon of Chimbalanga and Monjeza, what is the role of the international community in combating the pervasive stigma and bigotry related to homosexuality that millions of people face on a daily basis, both in Africa and around the world?

Gay Engagement Featured in Malawian National Newspaper