Human rights defenders are individuals or groups striving for the protection, advocacy and continuation of the causes that are held close to the basic rights and dignity of the people. The major responsibilities of human rights defenders are to keep in check policies that infringe on the basic liberties of an individual or a community, to campaign for civil rights and present recommendations through peaceful means to secure a smooth path for projection and awareness of the rights people have.
The UN broadly categorises the term defender as anyone, belonging to any gender, who is committed to human rights causes professionally, non-professionally, paid or voluntarily. The UN adopted the Universal Declaration on Human Rights Defenders in 1998, which Pakistan voted in favour of. Though the declaration has no legal binding on nations, it contains principles and clauses that are legally binding in other treaties, namely the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which Pakistan is a party. More so, it contains guidance for party nations to comply and form laws that ensure the protection of human rights defenders. The UN Human Rights Council has devised the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), which records progress on the human rights situation in party states where they also receive recommendations from other nations. In its last 2012 UPR, Pakistan accepted seven recommendations for providing security, combating impunity, ensuring provision of justice to rights defenders, introducing strong legislation to protect journalists, aligning legislation with those stipulated in the UN Declaration of Human Rights Defenders and implementing measures to protect the lives of these defenders. Pakistan has also received the recommendation of formulating a national policy for protection of human rights defenders but so far it remains unimplemented.
In the absence of any protection from the state in Pakistan, human rights defenders working on sensitive issues stand vulnerable to threats from those who consider demands of equality, justice and security to be in contradiction to their rigid social conventions. As most of the current laws were brought into jurisprudence during General Zia’s era of radicalisation of the Constitution, the oppressed — in particular the minorities — have borne the worst brunt of injustice, which makes human rights defenders easy targets of violence for voicing their concerns. Any demand or attempt made by lawmakers to change draconian laws has been heavily obstructed and silenced. Things are predominantly left as they are because it suits certain circles of power in the state.
Every human rights defender should be able to enjoy the right to life and security, due process of the law, freedom of movement, accessing and imparting information, and freedom of expression. However, this is not happening here. The perceived sense of security is very different from the reality. When in the field, with the current set up of society, there is sheer opposition to the advocacy of human rights, which is further entrenched in a feudal mentality. Also, there is a misperceived notion that human rights advocacy groups are working on a ‘western agenda’. This propaganda has been spread by religious-political parties. It is not just society that is maligning advocacy work for religious and political motives, it is also the state that is party to intimidating human rights workers or individuals practicing their right to information and freedom of expression. The state has been bringing up sedition charges against human rights and political activists in Gilgit-Baltistan, thus blocking their right to express themselves. It is also ironic to note that harassment and attacks on rights defenders continue with impunity, thus creating an air of silence and fear in society. It is because of this that oppressors and tyrants are given protection whereas the rights of the oppressed and poor people are constantly violated. Bigotry and hate speech on sensitive issues have also become the reasons for violence against human rights defenders.
Many human rights defenders and individuals have been targeted for their causes. On May 7 last year, a human rights activist, Rashid Rehman, lost his life because he was defending a blasphemy accused in a Multan prison. What causes more concern about this case is that Rashid Rehman had complained of the threats he received from his known opponents, yet no action was ever taken by the police to even question those named by Rashid Rehman in his complaint.
The recent murder of Sabeen Mahmud represents shrinking spaces for expression of ideas and views due to violent threats and intimidation. The case in point is the very prevalent existence of the issue of missing persons in Balochistan. Sabeen Mahmud was shot dead by gunmen in her car while she was on her way home after organising an event featuring Mama Qadeer, a powerful spokesman for the missing persons in Balochistan. It is also imperative to mention here that Mama Qadeer himself was refrained from speaking at another similar event organised by the Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS).
While taking into consideration the importance of human rights defenders in a society with a view to bringing transparency and accountability to the people, the Constitution and policies the state undertakes should enshrine the protection of the lives of these people because of the sensitivity of their work. Currently, no organised work is being carried out for the protection for human rights defenders, despite the fact there is a crying need to look into this dynamically by bringing into the loop networking between civil society organisations and political parties so as to stress upon the government the necessity of taking steps through its law-making machinery.
The writer is a freelance columnist and may be contacted at [email protected]