Feature ArticleWhere Are Human Rights Headed in the World? The Answer Is Blowing in the Wind By Paulo Lugon Arantes* “Be warned: this could happen again”
Volker Türk, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights In a clearly atypical year, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), the United Nations’ global parliament on the subject, began its most important session of the year in February known as the High-level Segment. In this segment, senior authorities from member states register to the world their concerns and directions for the global wind of human rights. This year’s Segment opened with UN Secretary-General Antônio Guterres declaring that “human rights are the oxygen of humanity (…) but, one by one, human rights are being suffocated.” This statement was complemented, shortly afterwards, by High Commissioner Voker Turk himself, who warned, at the high point of his speech, that the consolidation of human rights is not a given, although, at the end, he said that there is a way to ensure them. The messages from the various national and regional delegations were tempered with traditional diplomatic restraint. The European Union made a solemn speech, declaring that it “can count on the EU to continue to be a reliable partner in collaboration with our common agenda”, quietly filling a space left by the US withdrawal from the UNHRC. China did not shy away from also filling this space with a well-known tone of cooperation and solidarity in relation to its own vision of a correct UNHRC. India, also a promoter of the philosophy of cooperation, praised the importance of multilateralism, even while advocating a reform of its structures so that they reflect current global realities, without which human rights violations will increase. In a similar tone, South Africa declared that it would continue to advocate reform of the global governance institutions, criticizing the selectivity (cherry-picking) present in the Council – a criticism that dates back to the former Commission on Human Rights, which was succeeded by the Council. Such speeches contrast with a silence: that of the U.S. delegation. This silence, however, is full of meanings, the most obvious of which is the Trump II administration's clear position on human rights. The United States' return to the Geneva Consensus Declaration, which denies the concept of gender, and its defense of its concept of freedom of expression, perhaps speak for themselves, without needing to be heard in a speech. Another possible meaning: a demonstration of supremacy, of not needing to explain to the world community its very clear position on universal human standards, established over the last eight decades. Traditionally, on a global level, the United States denies the existence of Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights (ESCER). But it supports essential issues, such as civic space and human rights defenders, lending its political weight and influence in this regard. However, with the complete departure from the UNHRC, many defenders, including those of environmental and social issues, lose an important voice. At the same time, the United States is also losing much of its soft power and civic leadership in this global arena where the dispute over concepts for hearts and minds is incessant. The so-called withdrawal of the United States from the UNHRC has more symbolic than official value. The country, still under the Biden administration, last year, already foreseeing a likely Trump victory, did not run for a seat on the body. So, officially, as a non-member of the UNHRC, one cannot leave where one is not. However, the abrupt withdrawal of funding for civil society organizations and the UN High Commissioner itself represents a traumatic exit. This abrupt move also exposes a structural and long-standing problem: the instability of the financing philosophy of the UN human rights system. And Brazil?
Human Rights Minister Macaé Evaristo participated in the first day of the High-Level Segment, giving a courageous speech. She officially defended the renewal of the mandate of the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Committee this year, in addition to giving one of the few speeches denouncing the rise of the extreme right – one of the main threats to human rights today. This threat is not only present in Brazil, but in a Europe that holds its breath with each vote count of its member countries, including the French and German governments, as well as the United States, on the other side of the Atlantic. Evaristo also reinforced issues that are important to Brazilian diplomacy, such as the Second Decade for People of African Descent, and announced Brazil's candidacy for reelection to the Council in 2027.
It was a bold speech, considering Brazil's wide range of alliances. Brazil is a founding member of the BRICs, a group that includes Russia and China, two countries that resist the idea of civil and political rights. But it is also a Brazil that is on the verge of concluding the European Union-Mercosur Agreement, whose overseas partner is reluctant to deal with mechanisms to address issues related to those of African descent at the UN. In short, this is a true crossroads. It is comforting to see Brazil acting emphatically at a time of internal uncertainty and internal struggles as well. It is hoped that this external impetus will also inspire those in Brazil, especially in the Congress that is more conservative than ever before. In any case, it was a strong speech that broke with the lukewarm and overly polite aura presented during the High-Level Segment, which is inadequate for such difficult times. And now, where is the wind blowing? And what is the answer blowing in the wind? The apparent apathy and politeness of the High-Level Segment, broken by Brazil, may answer that question: be careful with the strong trade winds and counter-trade winds that alternate without warning, typical of the climate changes that Pacha Mama (Mother Earth) is now suffering through. In this case, like an old sailor who takes the boat slowly through the fog, asking the poet for permission to pass.
|
