Latest news with #UnitedNations-linked
The Age
28-05-2025
- Politics
- The Age
Watt claims ‘factual inaccuracies' used to defer Burrup rock art World Heritage bid
Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt has accused a United Nations-linked international cultural heritage organisation of putting the Murujuga rock art gallery World Heritage listing bid at risk using factually incorrect information influenced by media. The bid to put the rock art gallery containing a million ancient petroglyphs on the UNESCO World Heritage list was dealt a heavy blow this week, with UNESCO poised to defer its long-awaited decision over concerns about the impact of industrial emissions on the area. The bid, supported by the WA and federal governments, was lodged in 2020 and a decision was pencilled in for UNESCO's upcoming July meeting. In a draft decision published on its website, UNESCO's World Heritage committee recommended the application be sent back to the Australian government to address concerns about the impact of industrialisation and emissions on the petroglyphs that make up the gallery. The draft decision to be considered in July was derived from a report by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), which is tasked with assessing sites nominated for UNESCO World Heritage listing. The UNESCO committee called on the Commonwealth to 'ensure the total removal of degrading acidic emissions, currently impacting upon the petroglyphs of the Murujuga Cultural Landscape', and 'prevent any further industrial development'. Environmental groups praised the draft decision, saying it proved industry – including Woodside's nearby North West Shelf assets – could not coexist with the rock art without destroying it over time. Watt, unloaded on the ICOMOS report. The environment minister accused the organisation of being influenced by media and non-government organisations rather than science.
Sydney Morning Herald
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Sydney Morning Herald
Watt claims ‘factual inaccuracies' used to defer Burrup rock art World Heritage bid
Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt has accused a United Nations-linked international cultural heritage organisation of putting the Murujuga rock art gallery World Heritage listing bid at risk using factually incorrect information influenced by media. The bid to put the rock art gallery containing a million ancient petroglyphs on the UNESCO World Heritage list was dealt a heavy blow this week, with UNESCO poised to defer its long-awaited decision over concerns about the impact of industrial emissions on the area. The bid, supported by the WA and federal governments, was lodged in 2020 and a decision was pencilled in for UNESCO's upcoming July meeting. In a draft decision published on its website, UNESCO's World Heritage committee recommended the application be sent back to the Australian government to address concerns about the impact of industrialisation and emissions on the petroglyphs that make up the gallery. The draft decision to be considered in July was derived from a report by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), which is tasked with assessing sites nominated for UNESCO World Heritage listing. The UNESCO committee called on the Commonwealth to 'ensure the total removal of degrading acidic emissions, currently impacting upon the petroglyphs of the Murujuga Cultural Landscape', and 'prevent any further industrial development'. Environmental groups praised the draft decision, saying it proved industry – including Woodside's nearby North West Shelf assets – could not coexist with the rock art without destroying it over time. Watt, unloaded on the ICOMOS report. The environment minister accused the organisation of being influenced by media and non-government organisations rather than science.
The Print
01-05-2025
- Politics
- The Print
From Manipur to concerns about autonomy, why India's human rights watchdog NHRC faces downgrade
The recommendation, made during GANHRI's 45th session in March, will not take effect before 2026, giving the NHRC time to implement reforms. The NHRC's accreditation has already been deferred two years in a row since 2023 because of unresolved concerns from earlier reviews over issues such as lack of independence, inadequate diversity, appointment transparency and limited engagement with civil society. The Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI), through its Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA), has advised reducing the NHRC's rating from 'A' to 'B' status, citing concerns about the commission's independence and lack of full compliance with international standards. New Delhi: A United Nations-linked body has recommended downgrading the accreditation status of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), a move that could strip the institution of its voting rights in key international human rights forums and diminish the country's role in global human rights discussions. Some of the key issues flagged by the SCA in its latest report include the involvement of police officers in NHRC investigations, the government's role in appointing the Secretary General and inadequate responses to human rights violations, notably in Manipur. The SCA also criticised the NHRC's appointment processes, lack of diversity—particularly gender and minority representation—and insufficient engagement with civil society. 'The SCA emphasises that the GANHRI accreditation system is a peer review mechanism which requires NHRIs to maintain their independence. In view of the information before it, the SCA is concerned that the institution's independence and effectiveness has not been sufficiently maintained in line with the requirements of the Paris Principles,' GANHRI said in the report. 'The SCA, in receipt of third-party information during its previous sessions, was concerned that the NHRC was not demonstrating adequate efforts to address human rights violations at a systemic level, nor has the institution spoken out on these issues in a manner that promotes and protects all human rights.' An independent international network, GANHRI oversees the accreditation and review of around 120 national human rights institutions (NHRIs) to ensure they meet the standards set out in the Paris Principles adopted by the UN in 1993. It currently recognises 88 institutions with 'A' status and 32 with 'B' status. Only 'A'-rated bodies are allowed to vote, hold leadership roles and directly participate in UN Human Rights Council proceedings. As of 23 April, 2025, the SCA's recommendations remain under review after the NHRC lodged a formal challenge under GANHRI's internal appeal process. Established in 1993, the NHRC received its first accreditation in 1999. It was granted 'A' status in 2006, reflecting full compliance with the Paris Principles, and successfully retained this status during its next review in 2011. However, during a 2016 review, the SCA deferred the NHRC's re-accreditation—and postponed making a final decision on the NHRC's status due to unresolved concerns. The delay was due to concerns such as the process of appointing representatives and the lack of gender balance and diversity within the NHRC's staffing. Despite these issues, the SCA ultimately reinstated the NHRC's 'A' status in 2017. Also Read: National human rights body calls for scrutiny of Amazon warehouse labour practices Concerns flagged by SCA The SCA raised multiple concerns about India's NHRC in its downgrade recommendations. One of the issues it flagged was the involvement of police officers in investigations. The SCA expressed concern over Section 11 of the Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA), 1993, which mandates the central government to provide police officers, including high-ranking ones, to assist the NHRC. The SCA believes this arrangement raises serious issues of perceived or actual conflict of interest, especially when allegations of human rights violations involve the police themselves. Such involvement can undermine the impartiality of investigations and restrict victims' access to justice. While the NHRC responded by highlighting internal efforts to select non-police personnel and clarified that officers are not appointed without its approval, the SCA found these measures inadequate. It emphasised the need to amend Section 11 to fully eliminate the government's role in seconding police officers for investigative duties. The SCA also expressed concern about the NHRC's response to human rights violations. It said that the Commission was not sufficiently vocal or proactive in addressing widespread or systematic human rights violations in India. Specific issues included shrinking civic space, targeting of human rights defenders and journalists, police abuses, custodial deaths, and weak follow-up on recommendations. 'The SCA noted that while the NHRC has reported that it has taken cognizance of cases of human rights violations against human rights defenders and journalists and reconstituted its core working group on civil society, the SCA is concerned the NHRC has not provided adequate information about how they are addressing the shrinking civic space and increased instances of targeting human rights defenders, journalists, and perceived critics,' it said. 'The SCA is also concerned that the NHRC has not publicly communicated its positions on these issues in a way that promotes the credibility of the institution and addresses the systemic nature of these violations.' Although the NHRC listed various actions and investigations, including its handling of hate speech and minority issues, and stated that it works closely with state human rights commissions, the SCA concluded that the response was still lacking. It stressed the need for the NHRC to take a more public and assertive stance in defending human rights and ensuring accountability. The SCA also raised concerns about the NHRC's lack of action in Manipur on human rights abuses since May 2023. It said that despite widespread violence—including over 200 deaths, the displacement of nearly 60,000 people, reports of extrajudicial killings, sexual violence and torture—the Commission did not conduct any on-ground investigation until the Supreme Court intervened in July 2023 and initiated its own inquiry. The SCA added that the NHRC was excluded from this judicial inquiry. Following this, the NHRC registered 25 cases related to rights violations in Manipur and recommended compensation. The appointment of the Secretary General was another critical issue the SCA raised. The SCA expressed concern about the government's role in appointing the NHRC's Secretary General, a senior official critical to the Commission's operations. The current structure allows the central government to assign a senior civil servant to this position, which, according to the SCA, raises doubts about the NHRC's independence. Although the NHRC defended the practice—arguing that a senior officer is necessary to effectively coordinate with government agencies and that the current Secretary General is a retired civil servant under its control—the SCA insisted the risk of external influence remains. It recommended that the NHRC be empowered to recruit the Secretary General independently through amendments to the PHRA. Lack of pluralism and gender diversity was one of the reasons cited for the downgrade recommendation. The SCA flagged the NHRC's lack of diversity, particularly the underrepresentation of women and minority communities. As of March 2025, only one of six standing commissioner positions was held by a woman, and a significant gender imbalance persisted among the staff—246 men to just 93 women. Furthermore, two commissioner positions remained vacant. While the NHRC cited recent efforts to improve gender representation in recruitment and stated its commitment to pluralism, the SCA concluded that these actions were not enough. It urged the NHRC to actively promote diversity in leadership and staffing and to continue pushing for legislative reforms that ensure equitable representation. The SCA raised concerns about the transparency and inclusiveness of the NHRC's leadership appointment process. While under Section 4 of the PHRA, appointments are made by the President based on recommendations from a committee of elected officials, the process lacks requirements for advertising vacancies or broader consultations with stakeholders. The NHRC defended its process as participatory, arguing that nominations are open and that public advertisements might deter qualified candidates. It argued that high-level appointments in India, especially in bodies like the NHRC, have historically followed a closed-door nomination and consultation model, where names are proposed by political leadership or peers, as there are concerns about public scrutiny and prestige. However, the SCA maintained that a clear, participatory and merit-based appointment process in law or regulations is essential for public trust and institutional independence. Another issue it highlighted was the NHRC's engagement with civil society. The SCA emphasised the importance of meaningful, ongoing cooperation with civil society and human rights defenders. It said it found the NHRC's engagement with NGOs and civil society groups insufficiently robust and inclusive. 'The SCA, taking note of third-party information, the response of the NHRC and other information before it, also recommended that the NHRC takes additional steps to ensure constructive engagement and cooperation with civil society and HRDs, and address systemic violations of human rights while ensuring effective follow up with the state and making its positions publicly available,' said the report. The NHRC said such criticism came from a limited number of NGOs and that it maintains constructive relations with many organisations. However, drawing on broad civil society inputs, the SCA remained unconvinced. It recommended that the NHRC take stronger steps to build regular and open dialogue with a wide range of civil society actors beyond formal settings. What is GANHRI accreditation system The UN's Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has an official partnership with GANHRI and its activities are aligned with UN standards, particularly the Paris Principles. GANHRI's accreditation process, conducted every five years by its SCA, assigns each NHRI a status based on its level of compliance: 'A' status signifies full adherence to the Paris Principles, while 'B' status reflects partial compliance. 'A' status grants institutions full participation rights in both international and regional NHRI activities. They can vote, hold leadership roles within GANHRI's Bureau and its sub-committees, and actively engage in the work of the United Nations Human Rights Council. This includes speaking during agenda items, submitting documentation and having designated seating. On the other hand, 'B' status institutions can attend international and regional meetings as observers but do not have voting rights and cannot assume leadership roles. They are also restricted from participating directly in the UNHRC sessions—they cannot take the floor, submit documents or receive NHRI-specific badges. At the UNHRC, 'A' status NHRIs receive special accreditation badges that grant them designated seating and access to certain restricted areas, while 'B' status bodies get observer-only access, which significantly reduces their visibility and influence in UN processes. The Paris Principles, endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly in 1993, serve as the international benchmark for the functioning of NHRIs. These principles outline the dual role of NHRIs: to protect and promote human rights. Protection involves handling complaints, conducting investigations, resolving disputes, mediating conflicts and monitoring various human rights issues. NHRIs are assessed by GANHRI based on six key criteria: a broad human rights mandate, independence from government, legal or constitutional guarantees of autonomy, pluralistic representation, sufficient resources and strong investigative powers. (Edited by Sugita Katyal) Also Read: UN-linked body defers NHRC accreditation for 2nd yr in a row, human rights defenders 'not surprised'
