logo
Human Rights Council Hears Concerns Over Displacement, Genocide Risks And Migrant Trafficking

Human Rights Council Hears Concerns Over Displacement, Genocide Risks And Migrant Trafficking

Scoop23-06-2025
23 June 2025
Of the record 83 million people internally displaced worldwide, at least 1.2 million were displaced by crime-related violence in 2024 – more than double the 2023 figure – amid a global decline in support for international norms, human rights and the rule of law.
The growing reach of organised crime in driving displacement and rights violations was the focus of a report delivered Monday morning by the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Paula Gaviria Betancur.
Driving displacement
As violent conflicts worsen globally, displacement is increasingly driven by the threat of violence or the desire of criminal groups to control territory, resources and illicit economies.
Additionally, in places like Sudan, Palestine and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), occupying powers and criminal groups are systematically uprooting communities to alter demographics, treating IDPs as military targets.
'Displacement is no longer just a consequence of conflict – it is increasingly its deliberate objective,' Ms. Betancur warned.
In these regions, either the State enables impunity for violent groups or national security operations worsen the crisis by punishing victims and fuelling further displacement, eroding state legitimacy.
IDPs in these contexts 'face grave violations of their human rights,' including 'murder, violent assault, kidnapping, forced labour, child recruitment and sexual exploitation,' she said.
' The rise in global displacement is the result of systemic failure – the failure of States and the international community to tackle its root causes,' Ms. Betancur concluded, calling for stronger support for the UN and accountability for criminal groups.
Genocide risks in conflict areas
Virginia Gamba, Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, briefed the council on escalating risks in Sudan, Gaza, the DRC and beyond during Monday's session.
In Sudan, where over 10.5 million have been displaced since fighting erupted in April 2023, both the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) are committing grave rights violations.
Ethnically motivated attacks by the RSF in certain regions mean 'the risk of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity in Sudan remains very high,' Ms. Gamba underscored.
Turning to Gaza, she called the scale of civilian suffering and destruction ' staggering and unacceptable,' noting the conflict has also fuelled rising antisemitism and Islamophobia worldwide.
Hate speech fuelling violence
As attacks on civilians and ethnic violence continue in the DRC, hate speech and discrimination have surged.
But this surge is also occurring worldwide, further exacerbating the risk of genocide.
'Hate speech – which has been a precursor for genocide in the past – is present in far too many situations, often targeting the most vulnerable,' said Ms. Gamba, highlighting refugees, Indigenous peoples and religious minorities.
For genocide prevention, she urged greater efforts to monitor hate speech, expand education efforts, and strengthen partnerships with regional organizations.
' The task of preventing genocide remains critical and urgent—the moment to act is now,' she stressed.
Trafficking of migrant domestic workers
Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons, Siobhán Mullally, presented her report on the trafficking risks faced by migrant domestic workers.
'The specific nature of domestic work, and weak regulatory responses by States, produce a structural vulnerability to exploitation,' Ms. Mullally said.
The crisis disproportionately affects women, as they make up the majority of domestic workers and 61 per cent of trafficking victims detected globally in 2022.
Conditions of domestic work
Many women from disadvantaged communities are promised jobs abroad, but upon arrival, realise they have been conned. They endure violence, labour abuses and sexual exploitation but are unable to pay the exorbitant penalty for terminating their work contracts.
Ms. Mullally cited the legacy of slavery, gendered and racialised views of domestic work and intersecting discrimination as key factors behind poor conditions and trafficking risks.
Most States lack the political will to enforce labour laws in the domestic work sector, reinforcing this crisis, she said, calling for stronger labour laws, safe migration pathways, bilateral agreements grounded in human rights and an end to the criminalisation of trafficking victims.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Cabinet minister Goldsmith involved in Seymour's UN letter controversy
Cabinet minister Goldsmith involved in Seymour's UN letter controversy

NZ Herald

timea day ago

  • NZ Herald

Cabinet minister Goldsmith involved in Seymour's UN letter controversy

On July 1, two days before the letter went to the UN, one of Seymour's advisers sent a draft to Goldsmith's office. 'Attached is the Minister for Regulation's proposed response... He mentioned that we had agreed to run it past your minister before we sent it off,' the email read. Act leader David Seymour sent a blunt letter to the UN after consulting Paul Goldsmith. Photo / Mark Mitchell 'It is a little more direct than what MFAT [Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade] might draft. Please let me know if your minister is happy.' Goldsmith's office responded the next day, asking for a phone call. By the morning of July 3, Seymour's adviser emailed him: 'Goldie is happy for us to send it. He is going to send his own mild MFAT holding letter on behalf of himself and [Māori Development Minister Tama] Potaka.' Seymour replied: 'Okay, great.' His letter was sent to the UN that afternoon. In a statement provided to RNZ on Saturday, Goldsmith said: 'When asked, I did not object to [Seymour] sending the letter, but when commenting on UN matters, it is the Foreign Minister's views that are relevant, not mine.' A spokesperson for Seymour said he had nothing further to add. Emails between Seymour's staff in June canvassed the options for responding to the UN and noted MFAT's preferred approach was a joint reply from 'relevant ministers' Seymour, Goldsmith and Potaka, in line with previous UN communications in 2024. Instead, Peters ultimately issued a Government-wide letter on August 11, striking a softer tone and expressing regret for the 'breakdown in protocol'. The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K. Barume, had raised concerns on June 12 about Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill, suggesting it failed to recognise Māori traditions or uphold Treaty principles. Seymour's reply branded the critique 'presumptive, condescending and wholly misplaced' and 'an affront to New Zealand's sovereignty'. After news of Seymour's letter broke in July, Luxon told media he agreed with its content but Seymour was wrong to have sent it: 'I expect Winston Peters to be the person that engages with the UN'. – RNZ

Another Cabinet minister caught up in UN letter saga
Another Cabinet minister caught up in UN letter saga

Otago Daily Times

timea day ago

  • Otago Daily Times

Another Cabinet minister caught up in UN letter saga

By Craig McCulloch of RNZ Another Cabinet minister has been caught up in the United Nations letter-writing imbroglio, with new documents showing David Seymour first ran his response past Paul Goldsmith before he sent it. Seymour, writing as Regulations Minister, fired off a blunt reply to the UN in July that prompted public rebukes from both Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Foreign Minister Winston Peters for bypassing proper processes. Seymour refused to concede any mistake but agreed to formally withdraw his letter so Peters could issue one on behalf of the full government. New correspondence, released to RNZ under the Official Information Act, reveals Goldsmith, the Treaty Negotiations Minister, had been looped in early on and appeared comfortable with Seymour's approach. On 1 July, two days before the letter went to the UN, one of Seymour's advisors sent a draft to Goldsmith's office. "Attached is the Minister for Regulation's proposed response... He mentioned that we had agreed to run it past your Minister before we sent it off," the email read. "It is a little more direct than what MFAT might draft. Please let me know if your Minister is happy." Goldsmith's office responded the next day, asking for a phone call. By the morning of 3 July, Seymour's advisor emailed him: "Goldie is happy for us to send it. He is going to send his own mild MFAT holding letter on behalf of himself and [Māori Development Minister Tama] Potaka." Seymour replied: "Ok, great." His letter was sent to the UN that afternoon. In a statement provided to RNZ on Saturday, Goldsmith said: "When asked, I did not object to [Seymour] sending the letter, but when commenting on UN matters, it is the Foreign Minister's views that are relevant, not mine." A spokesperson for Seymour said he had nothing further to add. Earlier correspondence in late June showed Goldsmith's office drafted an initial "holding response" to the UN but requested it be sent with Seymour's letterhead as "the senior Minister for this response". Emails between Seymour's staff also canvassed the options for responding to the UN. It noted MFAT's preferred approach would be a joint reply from "relevant Ministers" Seymour, Goldsmith and Potaka, in line with previous UN communications in 2024. Instead, Peters ultimately issued a government-wide letter on 11 August, striking a softer tone and expressing regret for the "breakdown in protocol". The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K Barume, had raised concerns on 12 June about Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill, suggesting it failed to recognise Māori traditions or uphold Treaty principles. Seymour's reply branded the critique "presumptive, condescending and wholly misplaced" and "an affront to New Zealand's sovereignty". After news of Seymour's letter broke in July, Luxon told media he agreed with its content but Seymour was wrong to have sent it: "I expect Winston Peters to be the person that engages with the UN."

Another Cabinet minister caught up in UN letter-writing saga
Another Cabinet minister caught up in UN letter-writing saga

Otago Daily Times

timea day ago

  • Otago Daily Times

Another Cabinet minister caught up in UN letter-writing saga

By Craig McCulloch of RNZ Another Cabinet minister has been caught up in the United Nations letter-writing imbroglio, with new documents showing David Seymour first ran his response past Paul Goldsmith before he sent it. Seymour, writing as Regulations Minister, fired off a blunt reply to the UN in July that prompted public rebukes from both Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Foreign Minister Winston Peters for bypassing proper processes. Seymour refused to concede any mistake but agreed to formally withdraw his letter so Peters could issue one on behalf of the full government. New correspondence, released to RNZ under the Official Information Act, reveals Goldsmith, the Treaty Negotiations Minister, had been looped in early on and appeared comfortable with Seymour's approach. On 1 July, two days before the letter went to the UN, one of Seymour's advisors sent a draft to Goldsmith's office. "Attached is the Minister for Regulation's proposed response... He mentioned that we had agreed to run it past your Minister before we sent it off," the email read. "It is a little more direct than what MFAT might draft. Please let me know if your Minister is happy." Goldsmith's office responded the next day, asking for a phone call. By the morning of 3 July, Seymour's advisor emailed him: "Goldie is happy for us to send it. He is going to send his own mild MFAT holding letter on behalf of himself and [Māori Development Minister Tama] Potaka." Seymour replied: "Ok, great." His letter was sent to the UN that afternoon. In a statement provided to RNZ on Saturday, Goldsmith said: "When asked, I did not object to [Seymour] sending the letter, but when commenting on UN matters, it is the Foreign Minister's views that are relevant, not mine." A spokesperson for Seymour said he had nothing further to add. Earlier correspondence in late June showed Goldsmith's office drafted an initial "holding response" to the UN but requested it be sent with Seymour's letterhead as "the senior Minister for this response". Emails between Seymour's staff also canvassed the options for responding to the UN. It noted MFAT's preferred approach would be a joint reply from "relevant Ministers" Seymour, Goldsmith and Potaka, in line with previous UN communications in 2024. Instead, Peters ultimately issued a government-wide letter on 11 August, striking a softer tone and expressing regret for the "breakdown in protocol". The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K Barume, had raised concerns on 12 June about Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill, suggesting it failed to recognise Māori traditions or uphold Treaty principles. Seymour's reply branded the critique "presumptive, condescending and wholly misplaced" and "an affront to New Zealand's sovereignty". After news of Seymour's letter broke in July, Luxon told media he agreed with its content but Seymour was wrong to have sent it: "I expect Winston Peters to be the person that engages with the UN."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store