Human Rights Watch Submission to UK International Development Committee (IDC)

Introduction

1. Human Rights Watch welcomes this inquiry. We believe that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have been an influential set of global targets for development, which have shaped the policies of many developing countries and international donors, as well as decisions around the allocation of resources.  They have contributed to real progress in some specific areas of development, contributing to increased levels of primary school enrolment and large reductions in levels of under-5 mortality.  But the MDGs have also been deficient in some significant respects, not least in their neglect of human rights concerns, both civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights.

2. Human Rights Watch believes it is essential that the post-2015 debate and process be used to build support for a broad conception of development – one that is rights-respecting, inclusive, empowering and sustainable. Indeed, we suggest that development is best understood and defined in these terms: not as economic growth or even as progress against education and health indicators alone (important though these things are), but rather as the creation of conditions in which all people can realise their basic rights and freedoms, civil and political rights, as well as economic, social and cultural ones. Human rights treaties create a relationship between those individuals and groups with claims to legal entitlements (the rights holders) and those with correlative obligations (the duty bearers). Governments have legal obligations to respect, protect and fulfil these rights, including when working through international organisations.

3. However, alongside these legal duties, there are a wider set of benefits that could result from framing development policy more explicitly and strategically around human rights, including through the incorporation of the key human rights principles of empowerment and participation, non-discrimination, attention to vulnerable and marginalised groups, and accountability..  This approach to development should be captured in new goals, targets and policies in any post-2015 development framework, and provide clear mechanisms for governments and institutions to be held accountable for delivering against these.

4.  Our submission highlights some of the costs and consequences of neglecting or marginalising human rights concerns in the MDGs and in many mainstream approaches to development. We identify some of the benefits that would result from integrating human rights into a new global development framework or new set of global development targets. Lastly, we make some specific recommendations to the Committee and the UK Government.  Given David Cameron's role as a co-chair of the High Level Panel, that will report to the UN Secretary General next year, the UK is well placed to influence the content and shape of any new global development framework.

The costs of neglecting human rights

5. These fall into two broad categories.  Firstly, a lack of focus on human rights is one explanation for why development progress has not been more inclusive or equitable in many countries.  Secondly, without respect for human rights principles, people can be  harmed by policies carried out in the name of development, especially poor people and those from marginalised communities.

6. Many poor people have been denied the benefits of economic progress or access to services because of discrimination and exclusion linked to their gender, ethnicity, religion, status as indigenous peoples, caste, political opinion, HIV status or disability. Because the MDGs make little or no reference to these types of issues, there has been much less incentive or accountability for national governments, bilateral donors or international financial institutions to address them.

7. For example, the MDGs make no reference to disability. However, Human Rights Watch's research on education in Nepal has documented widespread discrimination experienced by children with disabilities, who are prevented from getting access to school and realising their right to education by a range of barriers. [1] These include inadequately trained teachers, a lack of appropriate materials, no transport provision and negative attitudes towards children with disabilities. As a result, children with disabilities represent a significant proportion of the 330,000 primary school age children who remain out of school in Nepal.  These patterns are replicated elsewhere. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) estimate that children with disabilities represent more than one-third of the 67 million children who are out of school worldwide.

8. Similarly, in the area of maternal health, research carried out by Human Rights Watch in South Africa has documented a strong link between the neglect and abuse of women's rights - during pregnancy and in labour - and poor maternal health outcomes.[2] The way in which the health MDGs have been framed has encouraged a focus on rolling out proven maternal, newborn and child health interventions, but they have been less effective at promoting action to tackle more entrenched issues of discrimination that impact on maternal and child health outcomes, for example the practice of child marriage.

9. Discriminatory laws that may not commonly be associated with development can also undermine development efforts. For example, a recent Human Rights Watch report on Bangladesh's discriminatory laws on marriage, separation and divorce demonstrates that these laws not only disadvantage Bangladeshi women, but push them and their children into poverty, creating a cycle of poverty. [3] Despite progress on some MDGs in Bangladesh, many Bangladeshi women, especially those in female headed households, will not benefit from development efforts without legal and policy reforms that end discrimination in marriage laws.

10. There is no reference in the MDGs to people being hurt or disadvantaged by development efforts.  Nor do many developing country governments, bilateral donors or the international financial institutions use a human rights framework for understanding , mitigating and remedying the harm that may result from development efforts. Again, an explicit focus within the MDGs and in development strategies on human rights and associated principles of transparency, consultation, participation and accountability could have helped to correct this. In practice, large numbers of people are affected negatively by economic development strategies across the world – especially where these strategies lack opportunities for participation, are not transparent, and are unresponsive and unaccountable to those affected by them.

11. For example, Human Rights Watch's research in the Gambella region of Ethiopia has documented serious human rights abuses associated with the government's so-called villagization programme. [4] This programme is being carried out in the name of development - transferring tens of thousands of people from their existing homes to new model villages, where they will supposedly be provided with improved infrastructure and better services. The scheme is also described as a voluntary one. It is anything but. Our research shows that people are being forced to move against their will and government soldiers have beaten and abused those who have objected to the move. Fear and intimidation are widespread amongst affected populations.  Despite government pledges, the land near the new villages still needs to be cleared, while food and agricultural assistance have not been provided.  As a result, some of the relocated populations have faced hunger and even starvation.

12. Similarly, Human Rights Watch has documented serious human rights abuses experienced by child labourers working in artisanal gold mining in Mali.[5] While the industry is seen by the Mali government as important to the development prospects of the country, the abusive and exploitative nature of this work is having disastrous consequences for the health of many of Mail’s children. Between 20,000 and 40,000 children work in Mali's artisanal gold mining sector and many of them start as young as six years old.  We have recorded a significant number of cases in which children have been subjected to injury, exposure to toxic chemicals and even death. While the Mali government has acknowledged the problem and pledged action to deal with it, our research highlights the tensions between a narrow definition of development (boosting gross national income) and the impact of poorly regulated, badly governed, unaccountable and non-transparent  approaches to economic development on ordinary people.

13. In China, Human Rights Watch has documented the terrible effects of lead poisoning on children, resulting from rapid but very poorly regulated economic development in four of the country's provinces: Shaanxi, Henan, Hunan and Yunnan.[6] Underpinning this lead poisoning epidemic is a tension between the Chinese government's ambitious goals for economic growth and its stated commitments to protect the health and well-being of the Chinese people. In the absence of institutions that can protect the rights of Chinese citizens and hold local officials accountable for abuses, these commitments are barely worth the paper they are written on, with hundreds of thousands of Chinese children left to suffer permanent mental and physical disabilities as a result of lead poisoning and with no one held accountable for this harm.

14. This research is an important corrective to the idea of China as a great development success story, in which millions of people have been lifted out of poverty over the last few decades. It is true that China has secured very rapid reductions in levels of income poverty over this period, plus major improvements in infrastructure and access to services for many Chinese. But if development is defined more broadly (as it should be) to encompass freedom from fear and violence, the opportunity to participate in public life, the chance to communicate and associate freely, and freedom from abusive employment practices, ill-health and life-threatening environmental pollution, China's record is much less impressive.

15. These issues are also highly relevant to recent developments in the Middle East and North Africa.  Up until the start of their popular uprising in early 2011, a country like Tunisia was viewed in many development circles as an international poster-child for the MDGs, a country making rapid progress against some of the MDG goals and on the UNDP’s Human Development Index.  But for many Tunisians this progress was clearly insufficient – higher incomes and better services for some did not compensate for the ills and costs of corruption, repression, inequality and powerlessness nor satisfy their aspirations for greater justice, freedom and dignity. 

What can human rights contribute to development and a post-2015 global development framework?  

16. Governments have existing legal obligations to uphold and advance the human rights set out in international conventions and covenants they have signed up to, when working domestically, bilaterally or multilaterally, including through international institutions.  These normative and legal arguments cannot be made too often or too forcefully. But it is also appropriate to demonstrate to the wider development community how better integration of human rights can contribute to improved outcomes in both human rights and development terms, making development more rights-respecting, inclusive and sustainable.

17. A human rights-based approach draws upon the principles and legal framework of human rights, and requires that respect for the human rights of those affected by aid or development programmes is central to planning and operationalising that activity. It recognises beneficiaries of aid as rights-holders with legal entitlements and identifies governments and their partners as duty bearers with correlating obligations to meet those entitlements. Making rights more integral to development would have the following additional benefits.

18. Attention to issues of inequality, discrimination and exclusion. People who have not benefited from existing development approaches are often subject to discrimination and exclusion on the grounds including gender, ethnicity, status as indigenous peoples, caste, class, disability, HIV status, religion, sexuality or political opinion. A human rights approach obliges those who make or support development strategies to confront these systemic and root-cause issues, with political, social and legal reforms.

19. A potential check on the abuse of power. As noted above, many people are harmed or lose out from development processes because those who wield power do so without any meaningful checks and balances and without accountability. This applies to policies pursued by the international financial institutions, development donors or corporations, as well as to the actions of national and local governments. A human rights approach to development provides a framework for checking their power and holding them accountable, in terms of the impact of their policies and actions on local people.

20. More inclusive development outcomes, through a focus on empowerment, participation, accountability and transparency. A rights approach necessarily gives priority to the empowerment of individuals and communities and to their participation and involvement in decision making. A human rights approach also gives emphasis to freedom of speech, association and assembly, which is essential if communities are to exchange ideas and hold their governments and international institutions to account. Because a rights approach emphasises access to information and media freedom, it makes it easier for citizens and journalists to uncover abuses and it creates space for public debate about better development strategies.

21. Greater clarity about what people are entitled to and what governments are obligated to provide.  A top-down technocratic approach to development can hinder progress in the achievement of some existing economic, social and cultural rights, for example the right to food, water, housing and land.  A rights approach could help secure these benefits for the poorest by making it clearer what protections people are already entitled to and what governments have committed to realise in the treaties they have ratified.

Policy recommendations:

• Any new global development framework should be rooted in existing international human rights law and the obligations of governments and others to uphold their international rights commitments, including through key parts of the international human rights system, such as the UN Human Rights Council, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Treaty Bodies, and the regional human rights bodies.

• New sector-specific targets - for example in health, education, water and sanitation - should be linked to existing international rights commitments, with clear accountability mechanisms and include specific provisions to ensure that the poorest and most marginalised groups are included in strategies for improved outcomes in these areas. 

• National and international data on development should be disaggregated, so that it is possible to measure the impact of development interventions on women and girls, different income quintiles (particularly the poorest income groups), people with disabilities, ethnic and other social groups. These are the kinds of groups that can be overlooked by the existing MDG framework, which is largely based on national averages or aggregates.

• Consideration should be given to a self-standing goal or set of goals (and accompanying indicators) on civil and political rights, which measure country performance on issues like women's equality, non-discrimination, freedom of speech and association, access to information, and political participation.  One critical element of this should be government's adherence to the relevant international human rights conventions and agreements and a willingness to permit independent monitoring in these areas.

• Donor countries should use their influence to promote human rights with recipient countries and account for the impact of their aid and other policies on human rights in these countries.