HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS ANNUAL DISCUSSION ON WOMEN’S HUMAN RIGHTS, FOCUSING ON PREVENTION

The Human Rights Council this morning opened its annual full-day discussion on women’s human rights with a panel discussion focusing on good practices and remaining gaps in the prevention of violence against women.

Navi Pillay, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, introducing the panel, said the panel was dedicated to prevention, an essential aspect of countering violence against women. Preventing violence against women required political and financial commitments at all levels of the State. The UN system and particularly the Secretary-General of the United Nations defined three levels of prevention; these were primary prevention – stopping violence before it occured; secondary prevention – which it was noted corresponded to the immediate response after violence had occurred; tertiary prevention – the longer term care and support for those who had suffered violence. It was not always possible to make a clear distinction between these levels and that being able to separate them would help with regard to policy measures.

Sihasak Phungketkeow, President of the Human Right Council, also in introductory remarks, said the annual full-day discussion on women’s human rights would consist of two panels. The morning panel would focus on the good practices and remaining gaps in the prevention of violence against women, while the afternoon panel would examine conflict-related violence against women.

The panellists were Rashida Manjoo, UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences; Michelle Bachelet, Executive Director of UN Women; Dubravka Simonovic, Expert Member of the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and Chair of its Optional Protocol; Jimmie Briggs, Co-founder and Executive Director of Man Up Campaign; and Yuniyanti Chuzaifah, Chairperson of the Indonesia National Commission on Violence against Women (Komnas Perempuan).

Rashida Manjoo, UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, said the panel would discuss one of the most neglected areas in the global fight against women, the due diligence obligation of States to prevent violence against women from happening in the first place. State efforts in complying with their due diligence obligations should not only focus on legislative reform, access to justice and the provision of services for victims, but must also address issues of prevention, particularly in terms of eliminating the structural causes that led to violence against women.

Michelle Bachelet, Executive Director of UN Women, said that violence against women was not inevitable; it could be prevented and avoided with the right combination of tools and policies. Gender-based violence was a control mechanism over women’s freedom, choice and bodies, which also had its economic impact thought loss of millions of dollars lost through lost development, additional expenditures to fund programmes and policies and others. The scope of the problem of violence against women in all its forms was such that all the initiatives and programmes addressing it were still too low and that greater investment and resource allocation needed to be made.

Dubravka Simonovic, Expert Member of the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and Chair of its Optional Protocol, said violence against women was a form of systemic discrimination and violence faced by women all around the world. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women had focused its attention on the persistence of various forms and manifestations of violence against women around the world and had consistently voiced its concerns about States parties’ failure to respond adequately and holistically to such violence. The Committee had often been concerned that domestic legislation had not been put in place in line with international obligations to address violence against women.

Jimmie Briggs, Co-founder and Executive Director of Man Up Campaign, said 8 March was the hundredth year anniversary of the International Women’s Rights Day, a cause for reflection upon the vast successes achieved by bold advocates in promoting gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls. Nevertheless, the struggle to stop violence against women painfully continued. Wherever there had been conflict, violence against women had reached epidemic proportions. Rape was used to destabilize populations, destroy community and family bonds and humiliate and demoralize families and communities.

Yuniyanti Chuzaifah, Chairperson of the Indonesia National Commission on Violence against Women (Komnas Perempuan), said the main functions of the Commission were to prevent and address violence against women and to protect women’s human rights. Concerning violence against women in the context of conflict and past human rights violations, the lingering problem was that there was no common perception or understanding that violations committed by State actors, especially in security institutions, and sexual violence perpetrated by them, was an institutional responsibility; rather it was considered as an individual responsibility.

In the discussion, speakers said violence against women and girls was the most pervasive kind of violence in society. Violence against women in vulnerable situations such as victims of trafficking was particularly hard to detect and needed special attention. The increasing commodification of women also needed to be addressed. A persisting lack of timely, reliable and accurate data on violence against women prevented a better understanding of the scope of the phenomenon and impeded effective responses and strategies. Speakers stressed the fundamental role of civil society with regard to women’s human rights. Combating violence against women required not only national measures, but also regional and international efforts and close cooperation. Lack of education and training was identified by many speakers as a problem and required training of law enforcement and medical professionals.
Although great strides had been made in gender equality across the globe, the multiple and intersecting forms of violence against women was a global problem and largely unacceptable. The level of impunity for the perpetrators was also intolerable. Speakers highlighted challenges specific to women regarding domestic violence, sexual violence, rape and human trafficking.

Speaking in the discussion were Chile, Canada, Brazil, Costa Rica speaking on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries, Maldives, European Union, Japan, Cuba, Pakistan, Belgium, Paraguay on behalf of the Southern Common Market MERCOSUR and associated countries Chile, Colombia and Venezuela, Slovakia, Peru, Finland, Honduras Indonesia, China, Slovenia, Germany, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, United Kingdom, Norway, Turkey, Lithuania, Spain, Singapore, Iran, Thailand and Poland. The United Nations Children’s Fund UNICEF also addressed the Council.

The following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: Worldwide Organization for Women, the Women’s Human Rights International Association Association for Progressive Communications and Sudwind.

The Council today is holding a full day of meetings from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. In the midday meeting, it will hold an interactive dialogue with the High Commissioner for Human Rights regarding the situation of human rights in Libya, to be followed by a general debate on its agenda item on follow-up and implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. In the afternoon meeting, it will hold the second part of its annual day of discussion on the rights of women, with a focus on conflict-related violence against women.

Opening Statements

SIHASAK PHUANGKETKEOW, President of the Human Rights Council, in his introductory remarks said that the annual full-day discussion on women’s human rights would consist of two panels. The morning panel would focus on the good practices and remaining gaps in the prevention of violence against women, while the afternoon panel would examine conflict-related violence against women. The Human Rights Council had decided to incorporate sufficient time to discuss the human rights of women and in its resolution had decided to include annual day discussion in its seventeenth session, with emphasis on identifying remaining gaps in the area of prevention of violence against women. The morning panel would in particular focus on identifying practical steps that the Human Rights Council could take to prevent violence against women.

NAVI PILLAY, United National High Commissioner of Human Rights, said this morning the panel was dedicated to prevention, an essential aspect of countering violence against women. Most Member States had enshrined in their own national legislations the international legal human rights framework to combat violence against women. However the scourge continued to dwarf in magnitude any other kind of human rights violations. According to the numbers, one third of women in the world had experienced or would experience some form of violence. It was said that in some contexts at least 60 per cent percent of women would experience some form of physical violence at least one in their lifetime. Further that the General Assembly, the former Commission of Human Rights, the Security Council and many other bodies in the United Nations System had all acknowledged that violence against women was one of the worst forms of discrimination against women. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was asked to present a report on good practices in efforts aimed at preventing violence against women. It would provide an analytical overview of practices noted as good or promising. She stated that preventing violence against women required political and financial commitments at all levels of the State. It was further noted that some responses from States clearly linked the struggle on violence against women to issues of gender equality. The UN system and particularly the Secretary-General of the United Nations defined three levels of prevention; these were primary prevention – stopping violence before it occurs; secondary prevention – which it was noted corresponded to the immediate response after violence had occurred; tertiary prevention – the longer term care and support for those who had suffered violence. It was not always possible to make a clear distinction between these levels and that being able to separate them would help with regard to policy measures.

The High Commissioner said that the prevalence of violence against women was so high that no State had or would have the means to deal with the extent of the violations and the number of victims. Further that this was the reason that preventing violence from happening in the first place must be central to any strategy to eliminate violence against women. Ms. Pillay highlighted a second challenge as the general absence of monitoring and evaluation measures attached to the various initiatives to prevent violence. It was said that very little reference was made to submissions to the monitoring measures and impact assessment of the reported good practices. Additionally it was stressed that evaluating further practices were linked to two corollary issues, namely the lack of reliable information and data on violence against women and the lack of sustained funding for implementing related programmes. She noted further that efforts to properly research and understand the underlying causes and different manifestations of violence against women prevalent in a given society were still inadequate. The lack of consistent funding for initiatives and policies aimed at preventing violence against women hampered sustainable implementation of programmes and activities over time and greatly affected their impact. More in-depth research was needed to identify and understand the cultural, economic, political and social determinants of violence against women and the particular contexts and ways in which discrimination and violence against women manifests themselves. Ms. Pillay noted that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had contributed to efforts to prevent violence against women in a variety of ways, both at Headquarters and on the ground through field presences.

Statements by Panellists

RASHIDA MANJOO, Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, said that it was an honour to appear today as a part of a panel to discuss one of the most neglected areas in the global fight against women, the due diligence obligation of States to prevent violence against women from happening in the first place. The due diligence standard was firmly embedded within international human rights law and it had increasingly become the parameter which measured the level of State compliance with its obligations to prevent and respond to acts of violence against women. State efforts in complying with their due diligence obligations should not only focus on legislative reform, access to justice and the provision of services for victims, but must also address issues of prevention, particularly in terms of eliminating the structural causes that led to violence against women.

States should ensure that the root causes and consequences of violence against women were tackled at all levels of society, from the family to the transnational arena. In doing so, States should consider the multiple forms of violence suffered by women and the different types of discrimination they encountered, in order to adopt multi-faceted strategies to effectively prevent and combat this human rights violation. Although some recommendations referred specifically to State action after violence against women had occurred, it was increasingly clear that there was a correlation between prevalence rates and effective and responsible accountability measures. As regards addressing the structural causes of violence, Ms. Manjoo argued that the State’s obligation to provide redress could not be just about returning women to the situation in which they were found before individual instances of violence occurred. Reparation measures should strive for transformative potential and should aspire to subvert instead of reinforce pre-existing patterns.

The ultimate objective of State’s efforts should be the prevention of future acts of violence, but prevention should go beyond legislative measures and should include societal transformations that empowered women. States should promote and support their empowerment through education, skills training, legal literacy and access to productive resources. This would enhance women’s self-awareness, self-esteem, self-confidence and self-reliance. Women that were empowered understood that they were not destined to subordination and violence, they resisted internalizing oppression, developed their capabilities to be autonomous beings and increasingly questioned and negotiated the terms of their existence in both the public and private spheres. States should engage in cultural negotiations through which the root causes of violence against women could be confronted and the oppressive nature of certain societal practices made evident. In taking on these endeavors, States should act without discrimination and should commit the same resources to violence against women as they committed to address other forms of violence. Ms. Majoo expressed her hope that the discussions on violence against women would contribute to advancing the application by States of their due diligence obligation. Ms. Majoo encouraged the Human Rights Council to continue addressing the crucial issue of prevention and taking into consideration the recommendations emanating from the panel.

MICHELLE BACHELET, Executive Director of UN Women, said that violence against women was not inevitable; it could be prevented and avoided with the right combination of tools and policies. Gender-based violence was a control mechanism over women’s freedom, choice and bodies, which also had its economic impact thought loss of millions of dollars lost through lost development, additional expenditures to fund programmes and policies and others. There was no one time intervention to end violence against women but key investments could be made in prevention, such as ensuring that girls completed secondary education, furthering age of marriage, increasing participation of women in political lives and others. Experts agreed that a number of practical steps existed for primary prevention, including school-based life skills training for all children, additional protective measures for high-risks groups, early child interventions, revision of school curricula to eliminate reference to gender stereotypes, elimination of school violence and making schools safe environment for girls. Community mobilisation that engaged young people was particularly important, as real change must occur at the local level where the violence occurred. Even though the primary violence was so important, it was still neglected by policies and suffered lack of resources.

There was room for optimism, as the analysis of UN Women had shown progress made at reducing the level of violence against women, for example the use of soap operas to show negative effects of violence against women, the expansion of grass-roots initiatives from Uganda to a number of other African countries, the 360° media campaigns to bring an end to violence against women and a score of other project and initiatives. The number of examples of primary initiatives from all regions of the world was growing, together with the increasing involvement of men in campaigns and activities. UN Women was also a founding member of 13 organizations dedicated to addressing violence against women. In closing, Ms. Bachelet noted that the scope of the problem of violence against women in all its forms was such that all the initiatives and programmes addressing it were still too low and that greater investment and resource allocation needed to be made.

DUBRAVKA SIMONOVIC, Expert Member of the Committee for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and Chair of its Optional Protocol, said violence against women was a form of systemic discrimination and violence faced by women all around the world. The key universal instrument with regard to women’s human rights was the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Article 1 of the Convention provided a broad definition of discrimination against women that addressed both direct and indirect forms of discrimination against women. Further Article 2 of the Convention focused on the rights of all women to be free from discrimination, and the obligation of States parties to work without delay for the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women to ensure the principle of equality between men and women. The CEDAW Committee was playing an important role in providing the authoritative interpretation of the obligations of States parties to eliminate violence against women based on their obligations assumed under the CEDAW Convention. Further CEDAW had adopted general recommendation 19 on violence against women in 1992. The general recommendation clearly explained the interconnections between discrimination against women and gender-based violence. It provided an understanding of gender based violence as a form of discrimination against women and a violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Another crucial contribution of general recommendation 19 was that it spelled out the due diligence principle in order to elaborate States obligations’ with respect to violence against women carried out by private persons.

Ms. Simonovic said that the CEDAW Committee had focused its attention on the persistence of various forms and manifestations of violence against women around the world and had consistently voiced its concerns about States parties’ failure to respond adequately and holistically to such violence. The Committee had often been concerned that domestic legislation had not been put in place in line with international obligations to address violence against women. Ms. Simonovic noted that the implementation of the Convention was strengthened by the adoption of its Optional Protocol which now had 101 States parties. The Optional Protocol created two distinct procedures; a communications or petitions procedure and an inquiry procedure. The Convention Against Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence was adopted by the Council of Europe in April 2011. This Convention provided at the European level a comprehensive set of legally binding standards to combat violence against women and domestic violence and also established a monitoring mechanism. The Convention recognized violence against women as a violation of human rights and a form of discrimination against women which formed a cornerstone of a strong human rights approach. Ms. Simonovic emphasized that the Convention contained measures for the protection of victims of violence against women and domestic violence.

JIMMIE BRIGGS, Co-founder and Executive Director, Man Up Campaign, said 8 March was the hundredth year anniversary of the International Women’s Rights Day, a cause for reflection upon the vast successes achieved by bold advocates in promoting gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls. Nevertheless, the struggle to stop violence against women painfully continued. Wherever there had been conflict, violence against women had reached epidemic proportions. This was not just the result of violent male opportunism, but rather a weapon of war. Rape was used to destabilize populations, destroy community and family bonds and humiliate and demoralize families and communities. A doctoral study done at the University of Johannesburg explored the individual and collective impact of abuse and violence directed toward adolescent girls and young women. Among other conclusions, the study noted that when young women and adolescent girls were allowed to become fully active in the design of their lives and determine their individual and collective directions, they saw their actions as meaningful and restorative. Achieving gender equality and the prevention of violence against women and girls was simply an impossible goal without changing the lives of youth and men. Right or wrong, men were the definers of gender roles and identity. When initiatives began to focus on men’s responsibilities rather than simply dismissing them as part of the problem, they began to envision them as part of the solution.

There were specific dynamic examples of how youth, particularly young women, were being supported in their efforts to escape abuse and fully participate across all social sectors. Projects in Ghana, Belize and the United States empowered women and girls. At the Sistren Theatre Collective in Jamaica, what began as an organization of working-class women now included adult men and adolescent males charged with upending social norms and definitions of masculine and gender identity. Then, there was the Man Up campaign, a global initiative to engage young people to combat violence against women in all its forms through sports, arts and technology. The generation of so-called “Millenials,” as the present one was known, was on track to become one of the most educated generations ever. Never before had they been presented with the global consensus they had for social upheaval and change across al indicators of well-being. For the elders and soon-to-be-elders, they had a special role to the cadre of young change makers-in-waiting. Before going, they must ask themselves if those behind them were empowered and ready to continue the struggles and finish their journey, were they ready to lead, even when their desire to do so was present but not the capacity. Mr. Briggs quoted essayist James Baldwin who noted that, “The young grow up by watching and imitating their elders - it was their universal need to be able to revere them. What the elders have that they can offer the young, is evidence, in their own flesh, of defeats endured, disasters passed, and triumphs won”.

YUNIYANTI CHUZAIFAH, Chairperson of the Indonesia National Commission on Violence against Women, said that the Commission had been established in a response to demand from women’s movements for State accountability following widespread sexual violence experienced by Chinese women during the mass riots of 1998. Its main functions were to prevent and address violence against women and to protect women’s human rights. Based on the current context within Indonesia, the Commission gave priority to several core issues. Concerning violence against women in the context of conflict and past human rights violations, Ms. Chuzaihaf said that the lingering problem was that there was no common perception or understanding that violations committed by State actors, especially in security institutions, and sexual violence perpetrated by them, were considered as an international responsibility, rather they were seen as an individual responsibility. Victims of past violence in Indonesia found it very hard to find justice through transitional justice mechanisms. Another focus area of the Commission concerned violence against women and poverty and the issue of vulnerable domestic migrant workers who faced multiple types of discrimination and violence. The strategy employed up to date did not work as primarily advocacy initiatives served to reduce public sensitivity. On this issue there were still several questions to ask of the international community, concerning impunity of employers, state of ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers by States, and the efforts to solve global migration.

Turning to violence against women as the consequence of abuse of identity politics and moral and religion based policy, Ms. Chuzaihaf said that democracy did not automatically bring better conditions for women’s human rights and added that the reformation era in Indonesia resulted in regional autonomy on one hand but had also allowed for the process of reformation to be hijacked by certain groups. The Commission asked the Member States how they could bridge political tensions at the international level to bring human rights closer to countries with strong religious communities. Ms. Chuzaihaf commented that as a specialised national human rights institution, the Commission played a vital role as a bridge between civil society and Government, but the system of accreditation based on the Paris Principles did not allow specialised national human rights institutions to be accredited, even if they met the core principles of independence, pluralism and other criteria. The Commission was also engaged with developing integrated monitoring and recovery systems for victims, but the problems it faced in this core area of activity concerned the fact that donor agencies, including the United Nations, followed the trend to fund the Government rather than a civil society organization. The question here was how the United Nations mechanism would work optimally if the non-governmental organizations or communities of victims collapsed. In the experience of the Commission, victims of violence against women preferred to use informal or traditional mechanisms or institutions of justice rather than formal mechanisms which were more expensive and complicated. Unfortunately, some of the traditional mechanisms had less of a gender perspective and this was a challenge to how human rights mechanisms could bridge and solve this issue: on the one hand, it was easier to intervene through formal mechanisms, but on the other hand there had to be a sense of justice from the eyes of victims.

Interactive Discussion

In the interactive discussion, speakers said that the promotion and protection of human rights was a priority in terms of both policy and culture. Bringing about women’s rights entailed a number of challenges. Violence against women and girls was the most pervasive kind of violence in society. Violence against women in vulnerable situations such as victims of trafficking was particularly hard to detect and needed special attention. Delegations said that the increasing commodification of women also needed to be addressed. A persisting lack of timely, reliable and accurate data on violence against women prevented a better understanding of the scope of the phenomenon and impeded effective responses and strategies.

Speakers stressed the fundamental role of civil society with regard to women’s human rights. It was said that it was an achievement of the organized women’s movements and through their persistence and their continuous fight that the notion that violence against women as a private issue had been overcome. Combating violence against women required not only national measures, but also regional and international efforts and close cooperation. The recognition of women’s full capacity to exercise their own rights was important to their economic development and prevention of discrimination and violence. Lack of education and training was identified by many speakers as a problem and required training of law enforcement and medical professionals. Speakers noted the important role of the Council, adding that UN Women headed by Michelle Bachelet also had a key role to play in advancing efforts to protect women’s human rights. They highlighted a resolution adopted by the Council in 2010, which focused on eliminating violence against women; it stressed the importance of changing cultural attitudes. A comprehensive domestic legal framework was the key to combating violence and discrimination against women. Violence against women had a particularly negative effect on society because of the important role of women and girls in society. An effective strategy would be to engage men so that they viewed themselves as responsible, non-violent partners.

Speaking in the discussion were Chile, Canada, Brazil, Costa Rica speaking on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries, Maldives, European Union, Japan, Cuba, Pakistan, Belgium, Paraguay on behalf of the Southern Common Market MERCOSUR and associated countries Chile, Colombia and Venezuela, Slovakia, Peru, Finland and Honduras. The United Nations Children’s Fund UNICEF also addressed the Council.

The Worldwide Organization for Women and the Women’s Human Rights International Association also took the floor.

In the discussion, speakers thanked the panelists for their presentations on the prevention of violence against women. The reports provided a comprehensive review of violence against women and the challenges associated with rooting out the scourge. Speakers welcomed the examination of all the forms, causes and consequences of the many different types of violence and discrimination, including particular consideration for vulnerable groups of women, such as those with disabilities. Although great strides had been made in gender equality across the globe, the multiple and intersecting forms of violence against women was a global problem and largely unacceptable. The level of impunity for the perpetrators was also intolerable. Speakers highlighted challenges specific to women regarding domestic violence, sexual violence, rape and human trafficking. Preventing violence against women ensured women’s rights and gender equality. Speakers expressed their commitment to combating the phenomenon.

Speakers attached great importance to women’s issues and interests and recognized that challenges were present in preventing violence against women. There was no one-size-fits-all solution. Violence against women was a structural problem requiring an approach that went to the root of the scourge. Speakers said it was important to challenge the attitudes and behaviors which fostered violence and discrimination. Some speakers discussed measures taken to combat violence against women, including new and innovative programmes, legislation, reform, awareness-raising campaigns, improving access to the internet and other activities. Speakers shared preventive approaches used to combat violence against women and discrimination based on gender and sexual orientation. Speakers emphasized that the Working Group on the prevention of violence against women would effectively contribute to combating violence against women. Some speakers encouraged States to sign the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and its Optional Protocol.

Speakers reiterated that an annual full-day discussion on women’s human rights served as a forum both for an evaluation of the achievements and the identification of remaining challenges in the promotion and protection of women’s rights from different angles and perspectives. One speaker asked how a gender sensitive judiciary could advance women’s rights on the ground. Speakers inquired as to the best way to realize a paradigm or structural shift to improve women’s rights. Speakers asked to receive information about best practice plans, lessons learned and preventive approaches that had measurably reduced violence against women and children. The role of the United Nations and the Human Rights Council in preventing violence against women and ensuring equality was stressed.

Speaking in the interactive dialogue on the prevention of violence against women were Indonesia, China, Slovenia, Germany, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Norway, Turkey, Lithuania, Spain, Singapore, Islamic Republic of Iran, Thailand and Poland.

Also taking the floor were the Association for Progressive Communications and Sudwind.


Concluding Remarks

MICHELLE BACHELET, Executive Director of UN Women, in concluding remarks said that UN Women’s general priority was overall equality for women and this was a major concern. As an agency they had developed the areas in which they could be the leading organization because there were also other agencies that were working on women’s issues and they did not want to overlap or replicate what other agencies were already doing. One of the main gaps they had identified was in the political participation of women so they would be working on increasing women’s voices and participation in this area. They would also work on improving women’s economic participation and economic autonomy and empowerment. Women who were economically empowered and had political participation were also less likely to be victims of domestic violence, which was the third priority for UN Women, so all their priorities were completely linked. Women in conflict and post-conflict countries was also a fourth priority, but not just in terms of looking at women as victims but also in terms of including more women as peace builders and peace makers so that they had a voice in shaping and reconstructing their societies. They needed a seat at the table during these discussions. UN Women worked with a number of different agencies such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization to increase access to education for women and girls, with UNAIDS to address HIV/AIDS and violence against women, which were linked, and with the United Nations Population Fund UNFPA to further women’s health and sexual reproductive rights. There was a terrible gap between the laws that were on the books in countries and the implementation of these laws so women’s rights needed to be mainstreamed into judicial systems and women needed access to justice. In this context, technical support needed to be provided for countries that wanted to improve their capacity in this area. The involvement and engagement of men and boys was also crucial in ensuring that women fully enjoyed their rights.

RASHIDA MANJOO, Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, in her concluding observations said that an overarching principle, the solution to the many problems exposed during the discussion today, was education. Education was a transformative tool to be placed in the hands of local women to negotiate for themselves the lives they wanted. There were certain blocks to think about, such as recognition that violence against women was a human rights violation. Once this was recognised, States would have an obligation to protect this right, prevent violations by addressing root causes, prosecute perpetrators and provide redress to the victims. The continuum of violence must be recognised as well and incidents must not be treated separately. The failure of States to provide effective protection led to impunity, and impunity led to perception that violence against women was normal and acceptable.

DUBRAVKA SIMONOVIC, Expert Member of the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and Chair of its Optional Protocol, in closing remarks said that she would only address issues related to the work of the CEDAW Committee. This included activities regarding women in armed conflict. Ms. Simonovic also noted that access to justice and cases under the Optional Protocol to the CEDAW on discrimination and violence and against women were of importance. Also highlighted, was the work of the Committee on harmful practices that affected women, including female genital mutilation and other harmful practices. Ms. Simonovic said CEDAW considered that the protection of victims and the prevention of violence against women were interconnected. It was important to look at comprehensive approaches to violence against women, as well as global instruments such as the CEDAW convention and regional instruments.

JIMMIE BRIGGS, Co-founder and Executive Director of the Man Up Campaign, in concluding remarks said there seemed to be a consensus around the need to address violence against women, but what remained was the question of implementation. The role of men and boys in this process could not be understated and there were a number of programmes around the world working to engage men and boys and to change the way they looked at not only the roles of women, but also their own roles in society. In addition to these initiatives, there needed to be a robust education component on gender identity, especially around the issues of masculinity and manhood.

YUNINANTI CHUZAIFAH, Chairperson of the Indonesia National Commission on Violence against Women, in her concluding remarks said concerning decentralisation, the Commission tried to integrate monitoring from the bottom up and trained civil society to be a part of the effective monitoring process and system. Related to the media, Ms. Chuzaifah agreed that the media were a very important tool to promote the prevention of violence against women and the Commission was working actively with the media and was monitoring the media on the subject of violence against women. The Commission was collaborating with religious institution in Indonesia and tried to challenge traditional patriarchal assumptions with the data and information coming from the practice. There was an attempt to negotiate with traditional and religious leaders by presenting them with more progressive interpretations of data, events and trends.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC11/083E