16 July 2024
Last month a number of human rights organisations launched Declaration+25, a supplement to the HRD Declaration, designed to ensure better protection for all those around the world who defend human rights. This document recognises the failure by states to implement the 1998 Declaration while re-articulating the right to defend rights that is enshrined in that Declaration.
The landscape for human rights defence, the risks faced by HRDs and the understanding of how those risks impact different groups of defenders differently have all undergone much change in the past 25 years. The importance of the Declaration+25 document lies in its highlighting of key areas, themes and concerns that States must focus on in order to ensure that the HRD Declaration is being faithfully implemented.
For example, in ensuring an enabling environment for the right to defend human rights and recognising the dramatic rise in the use of Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation (SLAPPs) against HRDs, Article 5 of the Declaration+25 specifically calls on States to refrain from “the use by State and non-State actors (including business enterprises) of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) and related activities to restrict or otherwise impair activities for the promotion, protection, and effective realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including by passing anti-SLAPP legislation.” Since taking up the mandate, I have heard from defenders all over the world about how debilitating it is when they are hit with SLAPPs, and I have sent communications on SLAPPs to numerous countries, including Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Malaysia, Poland, South Africa and Thailand.
The additional risks faced by defenders holding multiple or intersectional identities, understanding of which has been transformed since the HRD Declaration was adopted, are also recognised. The document draws States’ attention to the fact that, for example, women, LGBTI or indigenous defenders may require particular support to ensure that they receive the same protections under the HRD Declaration as all other defenders. This is very welcome, particularly given the assault on women’s and LGBTI rights in recent years. In my report to the General Assembly last year on WHRDs, peace and security, I highlighted how it was specifically WHRDs working to promote the participation of women in public life that were among the most at risk in conflict and post conflict situations.
Indigenous defenders, who alongside women and LGBTI defenders, are not mentioned in the original Declaration, remain disproportionately at risk of being killed because of their human rights defence, often in the context of business and human rights. It is fitting that they are highlighted in the Declaration +25 as a reminder to States that ensuring they are included in due diligence consultations by businesses would be a step towards fulfilling States’ protection obligations under the HRD Declaration.
Lastly, the document takes into account how legal protections of the right to defend human rights have evolved since the adoption of the HRD Declaration and points to the jurisprudence that has been established in relation to HRDs since that time. This is hugely helpful in clarifying the duties of States which have arisen from the Declaration over the past 25 years.
The Declaration +25 is a valuable resource to reflect on where we are currently with HRD protection and to signpost a path for States to follow if they are serious about fulfilling the pledges they committed to when the General Assembly adopted by consensus the HRD Declaration in 1998.