Study Guide SOCHUM LGSMUN 2013

LGSMUN 2013 Social, Cultural and Humanitarian Committee (SOCHUM) Study Guide
Message from the Committee Directors
Dear delegates, I hereby welcome you to LGSMUN 2013 and the Social, Cultural and Humanitarian Committee in particular. My name is Hamza Hashim and I will be serving as your Committee Director for the duration of the conference. As much as I dislike telling people about myself, introductions are in order I am a first year A Levels student at LGS Defence Phase Five, with hopes of pursuing a career in law. This is my fourth year of association with Model UN, and having lost count of the conferences I have attended as a delegate, I am thrilled to serve as your Committee Director at one of the largest and most prestigious high school conferences in the country. This year, SOCHUMs topics were chosen out of an exhaustive list of traditional and contemporary issues which deserved immediate attention and assistance. To stand out from the crowd, you will need to demonstrate a complete grasp on the issue at hand with useful and strong insights and practical proposals to help the cause. I trust you all to be impeccable when it comes to diplomatic demeanour and be mindful of not only your countrys stance but also your dignified position as the representative of a nation. As delegates, you must realize that there is no consistent friend or foe in international relations. Diplomacy is key to resolving issues pragmatically. Aiman and I anticipate a remarkable level of debate from you all, and above all, exciting committee sessions. I cannot perhaps stress enough the importance of being well researched for SOCHUM at LGSMUN this year, and delegates, please keep in mind that this study guide should serve only as the beginning of your research. Be confident, know your stance and prepare for a scintillating MUN experience. Anxious to see you all come January. Hamza Hashim Committee Director, SOCHUM Dear delegates, When you go through this study guide, dont get bogged down or intimidated by the information presented to you. Instead take this opportunity to familiarize yourself with the global issues at hand and analyze their real world impact. It is essential that you research your country stance well and although diplomacy is very important, I advise you against 360 degree stance shifts. Hamza and I will be looking for consistency and that only comes with an in depth understanding of the topic areas. The Arab Spring and religious intolerance have been making the headlines a lot lately and it shouldnt be very difficult to find substantive material online. With that, I wish you the best of luck and hope to see you very soon. Aiman Shafiq Chaudhary Committee Director, SOCHUM
Introduction to the Committee

When the United Nations General Assembly was formed in 1946, the Social, Cultural and Humanitarian Committee was created. As one of six main General Assembly committees, it is often referred to as the Third Committee. The General Assembly, which has equal representation of all member nations, can only make recommendations in the form of General Assembly resolutions. Hence, decisions and resolutions in SOCHUM are non-binding. However, based on how these resolutions are worded, their tone and phrasing, they can be of crucial importance, especially with regards to humanitarian and social causes, and development aid. Since SOCHUM is a General Assembly Committee, it overseas various other U.N. committees and ad-hoc groups working towards human rights issues. Perhaps the most prominent in the UNHRC, the Human Rights Council, as well as United Nations Development Program, United Nations Childrens Fund, United Nations Development Fund for Women, The Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees as well as the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. There are many others that add to the list. Thus, its importance becomes immediately clear as a Committee working over a range of issues, both social and humanitarian, which has worldwide reach and coverage. Over the years, it has dealt with topics such as the advancement of women, the protection of children, indigenous issues, the treatment of refugees, the promotion of fundamental freedoms through the elimination of racism and racial discrimination, and the promotion of the right to self- determination. The Committee also addresses important social development questions such as issues related to youth, ageing, disabled persons, family, crime prevention, criminal justice, and drug control.
The Committees Mandate

The committee was established after the development of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. The committees main task is to strive for better compliance to human rights in every region of this world and thus promote international peace and security. As the name implies, the committee is charged with dealing with a wide range of social, cultural and humanitarian affairs, especially focusing on human rights questions. To reach these overarching goals, it focuses especially on the necessary undertakings to uphold the human rights of every citizen on this planet by addressing issues related to the advancement of women, the protection of children, indigenous issues, the treatment of refugees, the promotion of fundamental freedoms through the elimination of racism and racial discrimination, and the right to self- determination, but it also discusses measures of international drug prevention, criminal justice or crime prevention, seeing that they constitute major issues of social development. As consequence of this general mandate, the work of the SOCHUM is broadly linked to the work of many other UN bodies, which makes sense taking into consideration that most issues include a social or cultural aspect. SOCHUM thus works closely with those UN bodies and ad-hoc committees and oversees many of their projects. To give you an example: SOCHUM keeps track of the special procedures of the Human Rights Council and also reviews all of its documentation. SOCHUM can also conduct its own studies and request reports from the other organs. The better this cooperation works, the more effective can be dealt with current social issues. Other bodies which work closely with the SOCHUM include: the World Health Organization (WHO, established in 1948), United Nations Development
2
Program (UNDP, independent program since 1995), the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, working since 1948), the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR, established in 1950), the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP, constituted in 1972), or the United Nations Childrens Fund (UNICEF, created in 1946) . The Third Committee meets annually to discuss, form resolutions and vote on important issues. Each of the 193 member nations is allotted one vote, and vote passes with simple majority. Apart from dealing with issues that fall into their concern, the Third Committee can also elect nonpermanent members to the Security Council, or elect the judges of the International Court of Justice (only in cooperation with the Security Council). It is important to note that SOCHUM cannot demand action but only suggest that and what actions can and should be taken. Although SOCHUMs resolutions, decisions, and recommendations are not binding, they play a crucial role nonetheless as they can order or recommend studies and programs that are in most cases indispensable.
The Committee at LGSMUN 2013

Years of oppressive dictatorial regimes and totalitarian rules seemed to end for the people of the Arab peninsula when a wave of protests began in Tunisia in late 2010, which later became popularly known as the Arab Spring. It has led to the ending of the dictatorial regime of Muammar Qaddafi in Libya with aid from intervening NATO forces in 2011 and the protests initiated have culminated in the breakout of a violent civil war in Syria, between rebel forces made up of various ethnic and religious groups and the forces of Bashar al Assad. With the balance between legislation protecting the right to freedom of speech and expression, and the protection of religions from defamation becoming increasingly unclear, in light of recent developments in the Muslim world, the entire international community is in manifest need of direction on how to approach the issue. SOCHUM at LGSMUN is going to be far from conventional, with both the topics that have been chosen being novel, and as such that the direction and dynamics of the debate and discourse within the committee are entirely dependent on the delegates and their understanding of the topic areas. The committees first topic area has been chosen to facilitate engaging discourse on the fine balance between religious defamation and the freedom of expression and speech, whereas the committee hopes to analyze and look at the Arab Spring, in particular reference to the treatment of women and children as the second topic in its agenda this year. The chairs hope that delegates in SOCHUM will analyze the topic in exhaustive detail, and come up with solutions that are anything but clichd or conventional, keeping in mind the theme for LGSMUN this year.
Topic A: International Religious Legislation

1.1. Introduction to the Topic, Background
The concept of legislation on the freedom of speech and expression has been passed around through generations from the early ages of history. It materialized during the modern European rule. England had established the Bill of Rights in 1689. It granted 'freedom of speech in Parliament'. France also adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen during their revolution in 1789. Freedom of speech then became an official right. Article 11, clearly declares that. Here is what it states: "The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law." Then onwards, many declarations revolving freedom of speech have evolved. For instance, Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, states that: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Nowadays, freedom of speech, or the freedom of expression, is recognized as an international and regional human rights law. The right is evident in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
1.2.1. Freedom of Speech

Freedom of speech entails the freedom to hold opinions as well as to seek, to receive and to impart information and ideas without interference by public authority. The right includes the means of expression in its protection, be the expression oral, written or in form of art. The right to freedom of expression can be traced back 2000 years. It has established itself as one of the most essential liberties. It can not only be applied to information and ideas that are regarded as inoffensive, but also to those that offend shock or disturb the state or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no democratic society. Essential to this view is that these offensive information or ideas are presented in a decent and temperate language.
1.2.2. Freedom of Religion/Belief

Freedom of religion or belief has received considerable attention since the founding of the United Nations. The United Nations Charter does not explicitly mention freedom of religion or belief; however its human rights provisions provide the normative framework. Since then, many resolutions and the core human rights treaties have been adopted, which deal with freedom of religion or belief directly and indirectly.
The recent outbreak of violence in several Muslim-majority countries, ostensibly in response to a malicious amateur video created by anti-Muslim hatemongers, has prompted calls to formally restrict speech that insults or does not respect religions and prophets. Freedom House, along with many other human rights and free expression organizations, has spent years attempting to turn the tide of opinion at the United Nations against this idea, which has reared its head annually in the form of a resolution condemning the so-called defamation of religions. In 2011 we succeeded, only to see the progress quickly reversed as a result of the disparaging Innocence of Muslims video clip and the ensuing violence, which has left dozens of people dead around the world. Religious belief is a very personal thing. And everyones right to believe what and how they choose should be fiercely protected. But is religion itself entitled to the same rights as the believer? If one follows this line of thinking, an argument could be made that ideologies and concepts like communism and capitalism should also be protected from insult. Such bans are clearly inimical to free and open discourse, whether it be religious, political, economic, or scientific. Beliefs do not have rights, and laws that say otherwise are directly at odds with the fundamental rights of human beings, as the following questions and answers illustrate.
1.2.3. Why are laws or resolutions that prohibit defamation of religions or blasphemy problematic?
The concept of defamation of religions conflicts with the universal right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion itself by designating certain ideas as off-limits for debate and discussion by believers and nonbelievers alike. Even though it may be deeply hurtful and offensive to have another person criticize your religious beliefs, this is not in and of itself a violation of your rights, and you are free to
mount a defense with speech of your own. By contrast, restricting such speech is a violation of the right to free expression, codified in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. National laws against religious defamation and blasphemy have commonly been used to repress religious minorities, to restrict the ability of members of the majority religious community to practice their faith in the way they choose, and even to settle personal grudges. In Pakistan, 16 people are on death row for blasphemy, and at least 20 others are serving life sentences. A 14-year-old Christian girl with mental disabilities was arrested there last month for allegedly desecrating an Islamic textbook. And two prominent Pakistani politicians were assassinated in early 2011 merely for advocating reform of the countrys harsh blasphemy law. In Egypt on Wednesday, a 24-year-old activist was charged with blasphemy after sharing scenes from Innocence of Muslims on Facebook and speaking negatively about religions. As documented in Freedom Houses special report Policing Belief: the Impact of Blasphemy Laws on Human Rights and by other human rights groups, there is no evidence that restricting speech reduces religious intolerance. In fact, the evidence shows that prohibitions on blasphemy actually encourage or justify intolerance and lead to a wide range of human rights abuses, including religious discrimination, arbitrary arrest, torture, and even murder.
1.2.4. Why shouldnt religion have the same protection as race?

Those who advocate a ban on defamation of religions often falsely equate criticism of religious belief with racial discrimination. One could argue in response that a persons race is inherited and immutable, whereas religion is a belief that individuals are free to choose or change (unless they live in a country where conversion is criminalized). But the more important distinction is between discriminatory actionsuch as targeted violence or denial of goods and servicesand critical speech. The former is a human rights violation, whether it is based on the victims race or religion. The latter is not.
1.2.5. What is the United Nations Defamation of Religions resolution?

From 1999 through 2010, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) put forward a resolution at the United Nations Human Rights Council that urged states to prevent the defamation of religions by restricting the right to free expression. Each year it passed, but with a declining number of votes. Similar resolutions also passed at the UN General Assembly. Proponents of these measures argue that Muslims in particular are facing a wave of intolerance and discrimination, known as Islamophobia, that features negative portrayals of Islam and links the religion to human rights violations and terrorism. The ultimate goal of their efforts is an international treaty on defamation of religions that would amount to a global blasphemy law. In 2011, the OIC did not put forward the annual defamation of religions resolution. It was replaced by the vastly improved Resolution 16/18, entitled Combating Intolerance, Negative Stereotyping and Stigmatization of, and Discrimination, Incitement to Violence and Violence Against, Persons Based on Religion or Belief. That document focused on the rights of individuals to be free from intolerance and discrimination based on religion while calling upon states to take concrete steps to protect religious freedom, prohibit discrimination and hate crimes, and counter offensive expression through dialogue, education, and public debate rather than criminalization of speech. Both OIC member countries and Western countries, including the United States, supported Resolution
6
16/18. Member states have since launched the Istanbul Process, which focuses on how governments can actually implement the recommendations in the resolution. One expert-level meeting has already occurred, in 2011 in the United States, and the next one will be held in December 2012 in the United Kingdom. The upcoming meeting offers a welcome opportunity to direct the worlds attention back toward a response to intolerance that does not violate human rights or obstruct the free exchange of ideas. A new value is emerging in the realm of the peoples rights. Now two years in a row, the United Nations General Assembly has passed a resolution called, Combating Defamation of Religions. Although the Defamation Resolution applies to all religions, it highlights the negative projection of Islam in the media and the introduction and enforcement of laws that specifically discriminate against and target Muslims. The Defamation Resolution first introduced in the 60th Session (2005) of the General Assembly; however, have failed to gain universal approval. The West is particularly opposed to the Defamation Resolution. In the 61st Session held in December 2006, the Defamation Resolution gathered slightly more support than before. Still, the opposition persists.
1.3. Defamation of Religion what does it constitute?

The threat that a universal declaration in favour of something called defamation of religion would be adopted in the United Nations has been present for most of the past decade. Since 2002 a series of resolutions on respect for religion, and against defamation of religion, have been brought forward in various UN forums, generally on behalf of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference. First of all, we need to say that human rights protect human beings: not the ideas that human beings might hold on the origins and subsequent order of the world or any other matter. Yet, these resolutions have usually found majority support: that of 2009 being accepted in the United Nations Human Rights Commission by 23 votes to 11 with 13 abstentions. We should examine what the resolutions mean. A statement by a Pakistani official supporting the 2009 resolution claimed that Defamation of religion is a serious affront to human dignity leading to a restriction on the freedom of adherents and incitement to religious violence'. What this seems to say first is that what we will refer to as criticism, whether reasoned, satirical or contemptuous, of the content of certain beliefs (religion in this case) affronts the dignity of those who believe. Certainly an affront may be felt by a believer encountering some form of criticism. In the defence of such affronts', we should say that human progress has been built on the replacement of untenable ideas by more solidly-based versions, even though in the process there is a chance that sound ideas will have been attacked by proponents of the unsound. This is the challenging intellectual environment that freedom of expression seeks to defend. Dignity in the defence of one's views involves the potential for dignified withdrawal from a position that proves indefensible. It certainly calls for tolerance of those who criticise or attack one's views. The second part of the statement is even more problematic. First it is alleged that affronts to dignity lead to a restriction of freedom. This is incomprehensible. Article Eighteen supports the right to believe and proclaim belief in anything we choose, whether stupid or wise. There is no restriction of freedom contained in criticism: quite the opposite. Criticism offers the freedom to change one's views, or retain them if one so chooses. The suggestion that incitement to religious violence is implicit in criticism of religion is more problematic. This seems to mean that a critical assault on religion might be followed by a physical assault on the adherents of a religion by the supporters of the criticism. Those who drafted
and supported the resolutions may be able to cite instances in which it is completely provable that verbal attacks on ideas, as such, incited subsequent physical attacks on people and property. Be that as it may, what is definitely likely is that the adherents of a criticised religion might attack the critics. What is certain is that communal violence based on religious disputes is sadly common in many parts of the world. What needs to be asked is whether freedom of expression should be curtailed in matters of religion because religions harbour so many hotheads and bigots? Frankly, responding to criticism, or even insult, with violence is regressive and cannot form the basis for any interpretation of human rights. The progress of these resolutions was first stemmed in March 2011, after the murder of Salman Taseer. Pakistan submitted a resolution to the UNHRC without reference to defamation of religion and this received consensus support. (USCIRF, 2011) It seems that maybe some sort of horrible lesson has been learnt from Taseer's fate. The new resolution was concerned with combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatisation of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief'. The shift from protecting religious beliefs to protecting those who hold religious beliefs is much more in the spirit of human rights. The new resolution does not seek to restrict peaceful expression, but calls for positive measures, including education and awareness-building. What still concerns some defenders of human rights is that the resolution's reference to combating intolerance' and negative stereotyping' may yet contain the germ of a protection for the content of beliefs. Intolerance in debate of what one believes to be wrong may be an unattractive attitude, but it does not infringe freedom of expression. Likewise negative stereotyping is hard to define and indeed one can see that it might be possible to argue that someone is being negatively stereotyped on the basis of a negative opinion of the religion he or she professes. However, negative stereotyping is a risk that anyone takes if they engage in controversy. There is a warning here that defamation of religions' might not yet have wholly gone away and that the threat it presents to freedom of expression could be reintroduced in a less direct form.
1.4. The role of the UN

With the fact that religion and beliefs represent deeply personal and cultural issues, the international community has come to a firm agreement to protect them by eliminating all forms of intolerance and discrimination directed towards it. This commitment is inscribed in numerous overarching United Nation (UN) texts including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as well as Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (DROB or Religion Declaration) also directly addresses what is meant by the right to not face intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief as well as the duties of different actors towards achievement and enforcement. Such a consensus has emerged because the right to be free from intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief is seen as fundamental in securing other human rights and supporting human development. As a report from the nongovernmental organization the Bah' International Community eloquently states, The freedom to hold beliefs of one's choosing and to change them is central to human development as it makes possible the individual's search for meaning - a distinguishing impulse of the human conscience.
Though most governments have agreed to and recognized both the ICCPR and the UDHR and many have recognized the Religion Declaration, the realization of the elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief faces countless threats and challenges. The least of these threats is the fact that UN documents remain nonbinding and that, aside from the emerging principle of the Responsibility to Protect, there is no clear framework or mechanism for external involvement in cases of rights abuses. Instead, the greatest threats to eliminating all forms of violence have emerged in a post-September 11 the world and are demonstrated by recent events across the globe such as in Norway and the Middle East. These challenges come in the form of globalization, changing immigration patterns, and religious radicalism. These phenomena create situations in which individuals of different religions are more likely to come into contact with one another, and in which there is an easy tendency to stereotype and scapegoat religious and ethnic groups. In particular, Islamaphobia is often combined with anti-immigrant rhetoric, which demonstrates, as the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination concluded in 2009, that there is an intersection between racial and religious discrimination that is impossible to divide. Such conclusions have also been supported by the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Article 18), the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, and work by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief; these issues have also been debated at forums such as the Durban Review Conference and annual meetings of the General Assembly (GA) Third Committee, SOCHUM. As a response to growing Islamaphobia and as a way to prevent intolerance and discrimination, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has put forth many proposals condemning defamation of religion. The OIC has argued that the international community must act to condemn the defamation of religion, be it through verbal statements or cartoons, because such vilification has unintended consequences as defamation further fuels discrimination, fosters extremism, and skews perceptions. However, a majority of human rights groups and western countries oppose condemning the defamation of religion because international action on the issue can strengthen domestic antiblasphemy laws and lead to the imprisonment of dissidents like journalists and students. Moreover, led by the European Union, many actors argue that condemning the defamation of religion wrongly places the focus on protecting religions as opposed to protecting the rights of individuals to exercise not only their freedom of religion or belief, but more fundamentally their freedom of expression. In order to overcome this divide, the UN has recently sought to reframe the debate and focus on implement able steps to eliminate intolerance and discrimination. Overall, the UN has stressed that, while freedom of religion or belief and freedom of expression are interdependent, they are also interrelated and mutually reinforcing and can play a role in fighting all forms of intolerance and discrimination. Additionally, the UN has also strongly stressed that no religion should be equated with terrorism. The Human Rights Council has also focused its efforts on the protection of believers in resolutions as opposed to the protection of beliefs. Additionally, to avoid conflicts over where a line exists between protecting beliefs and believers, experts and countries have turned to focus on instances in which actions lead to the incitement of religious hatred. The Special Reporter on Freedom of Religion or Belief has also called for governments to take a more active role in leading intercultural discussions and creating education systems that support diversity and tolerance. While these actions have moved the UN closer to achieving its goal of eliminating all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief, none of these steps provide a clear answer to the issue of when and what the international community ought to do in cases where governments fail to protect basic religious rights and the freedom of expression. Resolving this issue will become all the more pressing as religious radicalism increases; anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, and Islamophobic ideas spread; immigrants and
9
minority groups continue to face indirect discrimination; and societies at large face acts of hatred, violence, and domestic political upheaval. In order to prevent such events from escalating into destabilized state-to-state relations and threats to international peace, the UN as whole, the GA Third, and other actors must act now. We have seen many instances where the freedom of expression is violated by the state legislation. A controversy has been ranging in France on the question of wearing hijab i.e. head-scarf in schools by Muslim girls. This controversy erupted a few years ago as some Muslim girls; insist on wearing head scarf in schools too, apart from wearing it at home or in private functions and public places. Though the government authorities have no objection to these girls wearing hijab in public places, it wants to ban wearing it in schools as the French government maintains it has to protect its secular traditions. It is going to ban wearing of crosses by the Christians and skullcaps by the Jews in schools. The French Government feels these are religious symbols and hence should not be allowed to be worn in schools. This issue needs to be discussed at different levels and should not be treated as mere threat to freedom of expression.
1.5. Case Studies

We would like to throw light on various aspects so that one can understand the real issues involved. Firstly, one has to decide whether wearing a head-scarf really threatens secular tradition of France? What does secularism mean in a modern democratic multicultural society? Is religion a threat to secularism? Is wearing hijab a religious or a cultural practice? Even if it is religious practice (actually it is simplistic to treat it as a mere religious practice) should it be banned? Another case is the minaret controversy. The minaret controversy in Switzerland refers to construction of minarets, which has been subject to legal and political controversy in Switzerland during the 2000s and a Swiss referendum regarding this issue. In a November 2009 referendum, a constitutional amendment banning the construction of new minarets was approved by 57.5% of the participating voters. Only four of the 26 Swiss cantons, mostly in the French-speaking part of Switzerland, opposed the initiative. This referendum originates from action on 1 May 2007, when a group of right of centre politicians mainly from the Party and the Federal Democratic Union, the Egerkinger Komittee ("Egerkingen Committee") launched a federal popular initiative that sought a constitutional ban on minarets. The Swiss government recommended that the proposed amendment be rejected as inconsistent with basic principles of the constitution. The minaret at the mosque of the local Turkish cultural association in Wangen bei Olten is the initial motivation for the initiative. As of the date of the 2009 vote, there were four minarets in Switzerland, attached to mosques in Zrich, Geneva, Winterthur and Wangen bei Olten. These existing minarets are not affected by the ban. The Pakistan Penal Code prohibits blasphemy against any recognized religion, providing penalties ranging from a fine to death. An accusation of blasphemy commonly subjects the accused, police, lawyers, and judges to harassment, threats, and attacks. An accusation is sometimes the prelude to vigilantism and rioting. Calls for change in the blasphemy laws have been strongly resisted by Islamic parties. Prominent figures like Salman Taseer (the former governor of Punjab) and Shahbaz Bhatti (the Federal Minister for Minorities) have been assassinated for their opposition to the blasphemy laws. November 2010, Asia Bibi was sentenced to death by hanging on a charge of blasphemy; the case that has yet to be upheld by the Lahore High Court has sparked international reactions. Punjab Governor Salman Taseer was shot dead by his security guard for supporting Asia Bibi. Salman Taseer had visited Asia Bibi in Jail and had held a press conference with her. He had told media that Asia Bibi will be released soon and the President of Pakistan will soon annul her death sentence. This triggered mass protests in Pakistan with
10
many imams of local mosques claiming that Salman Taseer had defied Mohammed and should be sentenced to death for it. Taseer was later assassinated in early 2011. Rimsha Masih is a Pakistani child who was arrested in Islamabad by Pakistani police in August 2012 and who could face the death penalty for blasphemy for allegedly desecrating pages of the Quran (or a book containing verses from the Quran) by burning. She is a member of Pakistan's Christian minority. Not long ago, the Islamic world was in an uproar over the caricatures of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) that were drawn in Europe, and the amateur film, Innocence of Muslims, which apparently came out of the United States. According to various prominent UK news organizations, including The Independent, the following comments posted by a 20-year-old British man, Azhar Ahmed, on the social networking website Face book, landed him in hot water: People gassin [venting off] about the deaths of soldiers! What about the innocent familys who have been brutally killed.. The women who have been raped.. The children who have been sliced up..! Your enemys were the Taliban not innocent harmless familys. All soldiers should DIE & go to HELL! THE LOWLIFE F*****N SCUM! gotta problem go cry at your soliders grave & wish him hell because that where he is going. Did Azhar Ahmeds Facebook post truly warrant a criminal trial? Especially considering that Mr Ahmed deleted the offending comments once he realized his mistake. Is the United Kingdom so restrictive on the concept of freedom of speech? Freedom of opinion and expression are protected under Article 19 of the Declaration of Human Rights. However, there isnt a country in which these rights remain completely unrestricted. Negotiating the fine line between limitations that can be justified under international law and laws that excessively impede an individuals rights is increasingly difficult; the ubiquity of online means of communication in citizens daily lives has changed the nature of the conversation. Even so, access to media and other modes of communication is as imbalanced as ever. What can we expect from a world where the people must retreat to the relative anonymity of Twitter to be heard? Similarly, while the Internet may make sharing opinions easier, it also generates its own new dilemmas. Internet censorship, regulation, and the means of circumventing both differ significantly from their counterparts in print publications and other media. Thus, beyond considering the differences between political, religious and dissenting opinions, the committee must also consider the consequences of different mediums on communications. In short, to what extent is a government justified in regulating the expression of its people? Does the international community have a greater role in this debate? These questions can only skim the surface of this issue.
1.6. Questions a Resolution must answer

On domestic levels, what prerogatives does a government have to regulate the right to freedom of expression and speech of its people? What can be done to better ensure the enforceability of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the ICCPR in places where greater importance is ascribed to religious sentiments and safeguarding religions from criticism?
11
How can the international community emphasize, at every possible opportunity, the vital importance of the intertwined rights to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion or belief and freedom of opinion and expression to the enjoyment of all other rights, as well as to stability, development, and democracy? What can be done to ensure the sustainability of the international human rights regime? What changes does the doctrine and narrative of universal human rights need to undergo to ensure compatibility with religions and their doctrines? What is the success rate of existing changes introduced and what were their shortcomings, and how does the international community need to structure all future approaches from here on? In places like Pakistan and Egypt, what can be done to ensure that the provision of human rights is continued, without proving to be a cause for more problems, with particular reference to various religious groups? How can the UN, more importantly, work diplomatically to persuade OIC members that religious intolerance can best be fought not through national or international laws prohibiting speech that defames religions, but rather through efforts, including education, public diplomacy, and the enforcement of laws against biasmotivated violence and discrimination, to ensure respect for the human rights of every individual?
1.7. Bibliography
http://www.harvard-jlpp.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/LeoFinal.pdf http://www.economist.com/node/13413974 http://www.freedomhouse.org/blog/trouble-blasphemy-laws http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2012/10/22/free-speech-holocaust-denial-and-defamation-ofreligion/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/courtney-c-radsch/global-blasphemy-law-wrong-response-toislamaphobia_b_1920109.html http://www.iheu.org/speaking-freely-about-religion-religious-freedom-defamation-and-blasphemy http://www.philosophersbeard.org/2012/09/the-concept-of-religious-defamation-has.html http://www.iclrs.org/content/blurb/files/BYULR_%20Jeroen%20Temperman%20(3).pdf http://www.ifex.org/international/2010/03/31/defamation_religions/ http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/politics/4985/united_nations_affirms_the_human_right_to_ blaspheme_%7c_politics_%7c_/
1.8. Recommended readings and research

Freedom of Expression and Religious Sensitivities in Pluralist Societies: Facing the Challenge; Temperman, J. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Protecting Religion from Defamation, A threat to universal human rights standards; Harvard Journal on Law and Public Policy, Vol. 34, August 2012
12
Topic B: The Treatment of Women and Children in the Arab Spring

2.1. Introduction to the Topic
The Arab Spring is a term given to the Arab Revolution which began on the 18th of December 2010. It consisted of a revolutionary wave of demonstration, protests and wars that occurred in the Arabian Peninsula - these included: rulers being forced from power in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen major protests being broken out in Algeria, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco and Sudan minor protests in Lebanon, Mauritania, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Djibouti and Western Sahara civil uprisings errupting in Bahrain and Syria clashes at the borders of Israel in 2011 May protests by Arab minority in Iranian Khuzestan weapons and tuareg fighters returning from the Libyan civil war triggered a huge rebellion in Mali wave of social protests, in september 2012, swept Palestinian Authority - demanding lower consumer prices and resignation of the Palestinian Prime Minister demonstations met with violent responses from authorities alongside pro-government militias and counter demonstrators The people want to bring down the regime' - main slogan of the demonstrators in the Arab world.
2.1.1. Causes
Dictatorial regimes and absolute monarchy prevailing in the region and causing a violation of human rights are the prime reason for the initiation of the Arab Sprung- these regimes also gave rise to government corruption and an economic decline which caused unemployment and extreme poverty. A number of demographical structural factors population consisted of a large percentage of educated but dissatisfied youth. The catalysts for the revolts in all Northern African and Persian Gulf countries have been the concentration of wealth in the hands of the autocrats in power for decades, insufficient transparency of its redistribution, corruption and a refusal of the youth to accept the status quo. The inflation in food prices and the rise in global famine rates involves threats to food security worldwide and is considered to be a major cause for the occurence of the Arab Spring. In the past years, living standards and literacy rates have risen and there is also an increased availability of higher education this has resulted in an improved development index of affected countries. Rising aspirations clash with a lack of government reform and contribute to the protests. Tunisia and Egypt lacked the significant oil revenue and were unable to make concessions to calm the masses.
13
The democratic Republic of Turkey and its success as a fast-growing but liberal economy and a secular state, motivated the protestors to rebel in the neighbouring countries.
2.1.2. Treatment
'The trouble continues in Syria and Libya. But while adults fight for political power, children and adolescents are faced with an increasing number of dangers. The longer these conflicts go on the harder it will be for children and young people. They get into accidents with unexploded ordnances, get injured or killed in crossfire, lose their parents, become refugees or go hungry. Older, more politically involved adolescents can get involved in democratic movements and find themselves in a different kind of danger.' The detained, including children, usually face systemic violations of fair trial rights. They are exposed to torture and ill-treatment in detention. In Saudi Arabia, many judges sentence the defendants to thousands of lashes. Judges have the power and authority to order arrest and/or detention, including of children, at their discretion. Children can even be tried and sentenced as adults if physical signs of puberty exist. Since this outbreak of protests for democratic reforms, women had been on the frontline. They had been organizing demonstrations, strikes and all-women marches in solidarity with the victims - calling for the release of their family members and trying to put an end to state-violence. Female protestors, like the male protestors, had been arrested and detained by security forces, too. As a response to the security forces blocking access to hospitals and reports of injured people being tortured in military hospitals, women attempted to treat the injured protestors in the safety of mosques and private houses. "In demonstrations in the universities, women protest side by side with men. In the streets of Damascus, women gather in the center of processions and men surround them to protect them. In villages, men start the marches and women follow. When the security forces arrive to make arrests, women intervene to prevent them. When the security situation prevents women from participating in street demonstrations, women organize meetings inside their homes. They use social networks and online videos to let the outside world know what is happening". Interview with a Syrian activist, January 2012 Women have been participating in protests and demonstration. On 16th March, 2011, families of arrested protestors and activists demonstrated in front of the Ministry of Interior in Damascus. More than 25 protestors were arrested including women who were charged with 'attacking the prestige of the state' and 'inciting sectarian stride'. Consequently, on 13th April, hundreds of women marched to Bayda and blocked the main road, refusing to leave until the men were released. On 7th May, military forces and security arrested more than 500 people including women and children. A couple of days later, security forces kill 6 people, 4 of which were women due to an all-women march in Baniyas. On 13th May, women organized a 'Friday protest of Free Women' in which hundreds and thousands protested in the name of those women who were killed and imprisoned during the uprising. Relatives of activists (male and female) were also targeted and threatned. In July, following raids in Maarat Al Nouman, members of the militia (Shabbiha) branded houses with threats: "If you go out to demonstrate, we will kill you, destroy your house and rape your families".
14
There are widespread reports of sexual assault and rape of women and children in detention. "In detention centres, women who participated in protests are insulted and labelled prostitutes. Traditionally, it is considered shameful for a woman to even enter a police station, it's even worse if she is arrested or spends time in detention. People suspect that women are sexually abused in these places. Hardly anyone makes complaints about such crimes or even talks about it. If it is known that a woman has been raped, nobody will want to marry her". Women were also abducted so as to pressurize their families to surrender other family members which were involved in protests and it was also a means of preventing others from joining protests. These females who were victims of abduction were often returned decapitated, with arms and skin cut off. "In the areas where there are the biggest protests, such as Douma, women and girls are targets of abduction. In conservative areas, if a young girl is abducted, the honour of the whole village is tarnished. Kidnapping has become an instrument of terror used by the security forces. We don't know where the women are taken".
2.1.3. Legislation in Syria

According to the 2012 Constitution passed by Assad, "The state shall provide women with all opportunities enabling them to effectively and fully contribute to the political, economic, social and cultural life, and the state shall work on removing the restrictions that prevent their development and participation in building society" (article 23). A provision expressly prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of sex was introduced in the 2012 reforms: "Citizens shall be equal in rights and duties without discrimination among them on grounds of sex" (article 33). Article 3 provides that "Islamic jurisprudence shall be a major source of legislation". Despite some legal reforms, most discriminatory laws remain and are still enforced. According to the PSA, the minimum legal age for marriage is 17 for females and 18 for males. However, judges allow the marriage of girls from 13 years and boys from 15 years. The female is not allowed to marry without the approval of a male guardian, i.e. the father or Mehram. And the marriage contract requires the signature of al-wali and 2 witnesses. However, the judge can override the objection of the wali if the latter's objections are not reasonable and if the marriage is contracted without the permission of the wali, he can request it be dissolved only if the husband is termed incompatible. Polygamy is authorized and does not require the consent of the first wife. A man who wishes to take a second wife must prove that he has the financial means to support her and must provide a legal justification. A wife must forfeit the right to financial maintenance from her husband if she works outside the home without his permission or if she disobeys him.
15
Image courtesy of The Economist, October 2011
Men can initiate divorce unilaterally, talaq (repudiation), on the condition that he informs the authorities of his decision. Women can initiate divorce by proving a fault before a court on the grounds of dissension, prejudice, lack of affinity, absence, or ailments. A woman can also initiate a no-fault divorce under the khula procedure whereby she forfeits her dowry and rights to financial maintenance. Following divorce, women retain custody of children until girls reach the age of 13 years and boys 15 years. Women lose all custody rights upon remarriage. A woman must travel with her husband unless it is stated otherwise in the marriage contract. Also, a woman is not allowed to leave the country with her children without the permission of the children's legal guardian. Within the penal code in Syria, the definition of rape excludes marital rape and the aggressor can be deemed innocent if he marries the victim. The man can only be prosecuted for adultery if it occurs in the family home. This does not apply to women. Moreover, a man can rely on any sort of evidence in court whereas a woman requires a written statement, such as her husband's confession to support her. If convicted, the male can receive a maximum sentence of 1 year imprisonment while a woman can receive up to 2 years. There is no law enforced that specifically criminalizes domestic violence. The female receives or inherits only half of the share granted to males. According to the Nationality Act of 1969, women cannot pass their nationality to children. In light of this legislation, the initiation of the Arab Spring, and the ongoing crisis in Syria has only exacerbated the problem of the provision of rights to women, and more importantly, children, who are now a part of the conflict. Many have been escaping as refugees to the neighbouring states such as Jordan, while many wait in anticipation of some positive change that seems long overdue.
16
2.2. Women rallying for political change and emancipation in the Arab Spring
Some of the most striking images of the revolt have been of women: black-robed and angry, a sea of female faces in the capitals of north Africa, the Arabian peninsula, the Syrian hinterland, marching for regime change, an end to repression, the release of loved ones, pr else delivering speeches to the crowds, treating the injured, feeding the sit-ins of Cairo and Manama and the makeshift army of eastern Libya. But as the revolt turns into hiatus and stalemate from Yemen to Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, Bahrain and Syria, one thing is clear: for all their organising, marching, rabble-rousing, blogging, hunger-striking, and, yes, dying, Arab women are barely one small step forwards on the road to greater equality with their menfolk. Women may have sustained the Arab spring, but it remains to be seen if the Arab spring will sustain women. From the earliest rumblings of discontent in Tunisia at the turn of 2011, it was clear those old images of Arab women as deferential, subservient and generally indoors would have to be revised. From the highly-educated Tunisian female elite of doctors, barristers and university professors to the huge numbers of unemployed female graduates, women were key players in the uprising that launched the Arab spring. In Cairo, they were instrumental not just in protests but in much of the nitty-gritty organisation that turned Tahrir Square from a moment into a movement. Women were involved in arranging food deliveries, blankets, the stage and medical help. In Yemen, it was a young woman, Tawakul Karman, who first led demonstrations on a university campus against the long rule of Ali Abdullah Saleh. Karman emerged as one of the leaders of a revolution still yet to run its course.
In Bahrain, women were among the first wave that descended on Pearl Square in the capital some with their children to demand change. And the Bahraini movement has latterly found a figurehead in Zainab al-Khawaja, the woman who went on hunger strike in protest at the beating and arrest of her father, husband and brother-in-law. "Women have played a hugely influential role this time and put themselves in danger," said Nabeel Rajab, president of the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights. "They treated the injured in the streets and nursed them in their homes when they were too afraid to go to hospital." In Syria and Yemen, more conservative societies, it took longer for women to join the movement en masse. In both countries, it took leadership blunders by the authorities to draw them in. In Syria, hundreds of women marched through the town of Beida to deplore the indiscriminate detention of many of their menfolk. In Yemen, when president Saleh said it was un-Islamic for male and female protesters to march side by side, thousands of women poured on to the streets just to prove him wrong. Women continue to support the demonstrations, working as nurses in makeshift hospitals and in ambulances, cooking food, delivering speeches and singing songs at the demonstrations. To the right of the main stage in Tagheer (meaning "change") Square, there is a large cordoned-off area filled with hundreds of women, most of them wearing black abayas, and small children.
17
Women have not escaped the human cost of this uprising. During the police repression of the Tunisian revolution, they were beaten by security thugs, and in rural areas around Kasserine some were raped by police after demonstrations. There were several reports of rape in Egypt amid the hurly burly, and a South African reporter for the US network CBS was sexually assaulted. In a notorious case in Tripoli, a woman, Iman al-Obeidi said she was raped by about 15 pro-Gaddafi militia. Scores of women across the region have also been detained or disappeared. A number of Bahraini women have been seized by the authorities, including at least nine doctors and four nurses. In Yemen, Karman was detained for 48 hours, though the outrage caused was largely a function of the "shame" of male soldiers seizing a woman from her car in the night. But in some cases there was evidence that women were able to protest with relative impunity and even used this to their advantage. "Since the beginning the riot police acted very brutally but the women stood their ground and waved their flags in their faces," said the Bahraini human rights activist Maryam al-Khawaja. "They were targeting the men, so the women kept coming out. Women have always had a presence [in public demonstrations in Bahrain] but this time it was very strong." In Syria, the reverse was true: women retreated in the face of the violence. On 16 March, a peaceful protest at the ministry of the interior by the families of political prisoners in Damascus ended in the arrests and beatings of many, including women and children. The Arab spring was not about gender equality. Women in all countries involved say that. But many are alarmed that their efforts risk going unrewarded, and that men who were keen to have them on the streets crying freedom may not be so happy to have them in parliament, government and business boardrooms. As one Egyptian protester, told Catherine Ashton, the EU foreign policy supremo, during a recent visit to Tahrir Square: "The men were keen for me to be here, when we were demanding that Mubarak should go. But now he has gone, they want me to go home." Egyptian women express concern that when the dust settles on their revolution and a new parliament is elected in November, there may be just as few female MPs as there were in the Mubarak era. The gender gap is gaping in Egypt. There were no references to equality in the new Egyptian constitution passed last month. Rebecca Chiao, founder of a women's rights group called Harassmap, said that there was already a backlash against gender equality. "There's a propaganda campaign against us, saying now is not the time for women's rights. I'm concerned about that," she said. "If you ask someone if they want gender equality, that's a loaded term here. Do you mean all women should be like men? Most would say no. If you mean women have choice and equal protection under the law, most would say yes." Tunisia's feminist lobby argues that the real battle is only beginning now, post-revolution. Of the country's young, well-educated unemployed whose grievances sparked the uprising two thirds are women. There is still gross inequality in pay and in inheritance laws favouring sons. But the first battle is women in politics. Earlier this month, the commission reforming Tunisia's electoral landscape for the July elections voted that there must be 50% parity between men and women on electoral lists and not just women on the bottom rung: they must alternate with male candidates from the top of each party selection and share the most important roles.
18
Leila Hamrouni, a secondary school teacher from a poor suburb of Tunis, is likely to run as a candidate for the party Ettajdid. She said: "We've got to really fight for 50% equality in the elections. I'm worried it won't be properly enforced. The smaller parties say it's great in principle but in practice there aren't enough 'competent' women. What rubbish! Even the rural areas have women lawyers, teachers and doctors. "Under Ben Ali, there were an awful lot of men who were far from brilliant, yet as soon as we talk of women in politics, everyone's asking about competence. Ben Ali used the issue of women's rights as propaganda for the west while stifling liberties and denying democracy. Some men might say to us now, 'Look what you've got. What more do you want?' It's difficult to explain that behind the orchestrated propaganda there is still so much to fight for." Khadija Cherif, a sociologist and university professor, is a member of the influential Association of Women Democrats and sits on the commission currently drawing up political rules for the July elections. Around 20% of the commission is female. "The women's role has been huge, not just in the revolution, but for years before it, from supporting the miners' strikes to staging sit-ins in textile factories. That role must now be recognised through gender equality on the political landscape." One concern on the secular left is that the return of Tunisia's Islamist parties could roll back the country's secular women's rights. The once outlawed Islamist party, Ennahda, denies it plans to limit women's rights, joining other parties in voting through the 50% gender equality rules for the election. Cherif said: "We're working with the Islamist parties. They supported us on parity. And they know we are staying vigilant." But elsewhere, women are adamant: this revolution was about regimes, not gender. "Men and women, we are all working for the same thing in this revolution," said Mervet el-Zuki, a Benghazi resident. "We want to be able to speak our minds, to be ourselves, to be Libyans. We want freedom in all sectors: psychologically, socially, economically. We want a happy ending, to be rid of this maniac family that controlled everything we did." Bahraini Noor Jilal added: "Women are not calling for their own rights but those of everyone." But Faizah Sulimani, 29, a protest leader in Yemen, hints that even though they are not calling for equality, women in Yemen have found themselves being taken much more seriously by men because of the impressive way they have contributed to the protest movement. "Our demands are somehow similar to men, starting with freedom, equal citizenship, and giving women a greater role in society," she says. "Women smell freedom at Change Square where they feel more welcomed than ever before. Their fellow [male] freedom fighters are showing unconventional
19
acceptance to their participation and they are actually for the first time letting women be, and say, what they really want."
2.3. When will real women emancipation and greater rights come about as a result of the Arab Spring?
The revolutions of Tunisia and Egypt were not about women's rights. Indeed, many of those most closely involved are critical of the notion. Many activists feel that if they succeed with the revolution, they will get women rights as a result. Society is already so fragmented, many argue, that it makes no sense to add another division setting women against everyone else; this is a time for everyone's freedoms, not women's in particular. On the other side, those who have been fighting for women's rights for decades are uneasy about postponing the battle. They say that when democracy and equality are attained, they will trickle down to women. They think it will fracture the revolutionary ideals to focus on women's rights now. Activists, however, hardly represent the mass of Arab women. Much of the progress on women's rights in the Arab world has come as a result of declarations from above, rather than pressure from below. It has been largely an issue for the elites, and a hobby-horse for presidents' wives; and what is given with one hand may be taken back with the other. The recent decision of Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah to allow women to vote in municipal elections is a case in point. Kuwait has, at the emir's insistence, introduced female MPs, but its parliament has also trimmed women's rights in other ways, for example by introducing segregation in Kuwaiti universities. Women's rights have yet to become an issue that moves the general public. The number of female candidates elected is of less interest to many women than how they will feed their children, whether they can get them to a clinic, or whether they will be able to send them to school. Those clamouring for change in Egypt and Tunisia today are mostly NGO workers, campaigners, lawyers, academics nd politicians. But to their voices have been added those of the women protesters who came out in their tens of thousands and demanded an end to the old way of life. For example, the International Federation for Human Rights suggests that recent history painfully reminds us that the massive occupation of public space by women during revolutions, in no way guarantees their role in the political bodies of the regimes that follow. Instead, the Federation continues, although the situation of women varies across the region, threats to their human rights converge *where women are confronting attempts to exclude them from public life. Amnesty international has expressed concerns about the little positive improvement that the uprisings in the Middle East have brought to women. Evidence of exclusion is used to support this point: In Egypt, there were no women in the two committees appointed to draft the new constitution. A new law abolished measures guaranteeing women minimum representation in parliament and women gained only 2% of seats in the recent elections. In Libya, the electoral law adopted by the National Transitional Council in January 2012 contains no quota for the representation of women in elected bodies. In Morocco, a law adopted in October 2011 established a quota of only 15% and in Tunisia the 41-member government nominated in December 2011 contains only 3 women. The results of the recent Egyptian election counts Egyptian women as unlucky, where they saw the parliamentary quota system from the Hosni Mubarak era abolished and female representation reduced
20
from 64 seats to just five meaning that Egypt stands above other Arab Spring countries in implementing regressive measures that hamper womens representation in government. A Reuters report suggests that opportunities from the Arab Spring to boost the low numbers of women in parliaments are being missed. Research shows that the real experiences of women in the Arab Spring were significantly more diverse, both in terms of the day-to-day life and in terms of political significance. Some Arab Spring women were peace activists, like the better known women at Greenham Common or of the Womens International League for Peace and Freedom. Others supported provided domestic and economysustaining services for protestors, much like the American World War II icon Rosie the Riveter. Still others provided logistical support and health care to protestors, comparable to Clara Barton and the Red Cross. Still others were active participants in agitating for regime change. Those activists were protesters, but they were also martyrs, political candidates, and bloggers in service of the cause of seeking democratic change. But not all women in the Arab Spring were for the changes that the democracy protestors advocated either. In fact, a number of conservative women have expressed concern that a gender rights liberalization that might happen as a result of or concurrent with democratization is a problem, arguing that being granted too many rights contravene religion and social norms. These women, arguing that work cannot interfere with womens mission, which is first to raise children and take care of the home, object to gender-liberal policies and celebrate some of the returns to traditionalism that have come with some of the post-revolutionary governments in the Arab world. Women had as many different experiences of the Arab Spring as they did positions on and roles in it. First, it is well-documented that times of conflict and political upheaval have gender-differential effects. Especially in the Arab Spring movements where significant military violence has occurred, and even in those where it did not, women have lived the upheaval. Families are often separated as individuals are arrested, injured, killed, or become involved in revolutionary movements. Within the family, each member assumes additional burdens as the normal division of labor is overturned. Health also deteriorates as individuals lack access to health care due to increased volume, a decline in the number of available doctors, and a lack of access to medicines and other supplies, which is often felt in sexdifferentiated ways. Once societys normal institutions have been destroyed by war or cease to function, then politics, culture, production, and protection come to be defined by militarization, which entrenches values associated with masculinities. Household or domestic economies characterized by a division of labor that is based on sex are also part of the way in which family units cope with crisis. The obstacles that women would normally face in terms of gender roles become compounded in light of the disruption to the infrastructure. Those disruptions do not end when the government transitions from a dictatorship to a democracy, or when the fighting on the ground stops. Instead, the social fabric of Arab Spring societies are not automatically healed or restored. In some of the more severe cases, infrastructures remain damaged, families remain devastated and grieving, combatants remain traumatized, and weapons and violence
21
remain available. In some of the places where transitions were smoother, massive political and economic insecurity still remains. Reading the two narratives of the Arab Spring as gender-emancipatory and as potentially genderoppressive next to each other in this context inspires asking questions like what those narratives signify, where they diverge, and where they agree. One of the political conditions of the formation of both narratives is the location of womens rights progressiveness (or backwardness) with state regime type and state government, where the form of government of a state and the status of government of that state is seen as a signifier of the states likelihood to treat women well, and the good treatment of women is seen as an indicator of the existence and success of other progressive political institutions or values. Particularly, what both narratives share is the association between secularism (particularly secular separation of Islamic religion and state), (liberal) democracy, and womens emancipation, where gender rights serve as a barometer for the genuineness of both democratic and secularist efforts. Using gender rights as a litmus test for a certain view of success of the Arab Spring is a double-edged sword at best, where women are used as a proxy for other values, and ones view on the implementation of those other values affects how one reads the situation of women. The signification of the narrative of the Arab Spring as gender-emancipatory is that the old Arab world of dictators without democratic process was backwards and of less value (generally or for women) than democratic regimes would be. It further signifies that protecting women includes in whole or in part means protecting them from Islamic governance and Islamic governments, implying that a liberal, secularist model of democratic regimes are better for gender. Many of the accounts that constitute the narrative of the Arab Spring as gender-emancipatory also strongly imply a model where the Arab world follows the West to secularism, democracy, and womens rights. Then, the woman-asprotestor becomes an object and a sign, where the objectification is a female body demonstrably having crossed the (presumed Islamic-only) public/private divide perceived to be built on sex lines and the signification of womens presence is the victory of a set of political values associated with gender equality (if not, or if secondarily, gender equality itself). Many of the same objectifications and significations can be found in the narrative of the Arab Spring as a risk to women. In this narrative, the Arab Spring is less successful because it has not translated gains in democracy to secularism and/or womens rights, and is therefore not actually, genuinely, or meaningfully more democratic. In addition to this general association of the backwardness of the abuse of women and the backwardness of politics, there is a strong a differentiation between the good old boy Arab dictators, perceived to have bestowed rights on women voluntarily if instrumentally, and the new, hypermasculine, conservative revolutionaries, who are framed to have a principled objection to the fair and equal treatment of women. Age, sexuality, and mystery go into the building of the new Arab democrat as scarier than the old Arab dictator, though neither meets the criteria implicit in the idealized state that provides the idealized treatment of women.
2.4. The role of the UN with regards to the treatment of minors

The Human Rights Commission, in a report published in Syria, in August 2012, recorded the killing of 125 children, mainly boys, after 15 February 2012. In Libya, boys as young as seven years of age assisted the rebels in the fight against Qaddafis forces and were given informal training on the use of weaponry. School opened in Libya some five months after the Qaddafi regime was overthrown, and even then, many schools remained closed because
22
children were either too scared to attend or the school did not have the proper staff or infrastructure or staff left to maintain its operations. Children in Syria are subjected to "appalling" torture, imprisonment and abduction, and these atrocities should be better documented, a report by British charity Save the Children says. These atrocities include being shot dead in front of friends and family to torture techniques never seen before in the Arab world, all aimed at inflicting maximum pain on these children. The UN says more than 20,000 people have been killed since anti-government protests began in Syria in March 2011. Activists put the death toll as high as 30,000. Violence continued across the country in the months after September, with activists saying the government had bombed parts of the second city, Aleppo. The Local Coordination Committees, an opposition activist network, reported that at least 40,000 people had died in fighting, including 8,600 in Aleppo. The group said the victims included three children from one family killed in air strikes in the central district of Maadi. In addition to the fighting in Aleppo, anti-government activist group the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported that a five year-old girl and a man were killed during the bombardment of the southern town of Dael, in Deraa province. Clashes between government forces and rebels were also reported in the north-eastern and northwestern districts of the capital, Damascus. More than 260,000 Syrians have fled to neighbouring countries, the UN says. There are also thought to be more than 1.2 million internally displaced people, and 2.5 million in need of humanitarian assistance. Perhaps something extraordinary about the conflicts in Libya and Syria was the participation and harming of children as young as 4, and sometimes, involvement in the armed conflict, something which the international community has not witnessed in any documented conflict in the past three decades. Children have also been used as human shields in Syria, where they were tied to tanks, to prevent them from being fired upon. Children as young as 14 recall seeing the corpses of their classmates and friend being fed upon by dogs after local massacres in the outskirts of Aleppo in the summer of 2012. "Another thing they do is to use children to protect themselves. They know we can't shoot our own children, so they put the children in front so they're a human shield and march into our villages. It's terrifying for the children. Many of them die. Children were killed or injured during shelling of towns and villages and often killed or wounded by snipers. Children were also attacked on protests. Moreover, reports have been received of arbitrary arrest and detention of children. Children described having been beaten, whipped with electric cables, burned with cigarettes and subjected to electric shocks to genitals. The commission also received reports of the rape and sexual assault of girls under the age of 18. Schools in various locations were looted, vandalized and burned in response to student protest. Moreover,
23
in some detention centres, children were detained with adults, which is a major violation of humanitarian law. Many children have been left mentally scarred and traumatized by the violence, with many having viewed crimes of violent nature take place before their own eyes, and a sizable majority having seen people they know family, loved ones, friends, be injured or killed by the use of brutality through the rampant use of weaponry within their nations. Children in Syria have been shot dead by the forces of Assad as their friends and families stood watching, only to later become a victim of the same fate. Delegates, be cognizant of the need to protect children rights within all nations that have been effected by the violence that has broken out as a result of the events of the Arab Spring. With all nations concerned being party to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, it is up to you to decide a proper institutionalized framework that the UN must use to safeguard these rights and to save the future of these nations, that is these children.
2.5. The refugee crisis created by events of the Arab Spring

The trajectory of peaceful demonstrations in Libya and Syria has been impacted by regime violence. The result: large populations of internally displaced peoples (IDP's) have been created inside of those countries as well as great numbers of refugees fleeing to bordering countries. Furthermore, the revolutions of the Arab Spring have serious ramifications for already existing refugee populations, notably the more than one million Iraqi refugees that have settled in Syria since 2006. The possibility of increased large-scale refugee movement from Libya and Syria will not only spur a devastating humanitarian crisis, but could also further destabilize the region. Considering that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is already working with insufficient funds, Western policymakers should pay attention to these imminent crises. One need only look at the social and economic repercussions of the still unresolved predicament of Iraqi refugees to see the urgency of keeping the current situations from escalating into another protracted refugee crisis. The consequences of a prolonged refugee situation could be dire, especially as many of the countries to which the people are fleeing allow few - if any - rights, benefits, or protection for refugees. The Libyan refugee situation is complicated by the large number of third-country nationals who are attempting to flee to Europe by boat. As Al Jazeera reported, over 1,400 people have died at sea since the uprising in Libya began in February. This situation has become so alarming that the U.N. has even made appeals to ships in the Mediterranean to look out for crude vessels that might be carrying refugees from Libya. In addition to these issues of concern are the estimated 250,000 internally displaced people still inside of Libya. Oftentimes, the internally displaced are the most vulnerable as it is extremely difficult to provide food and supplies to those trapped inside a conflict zone. Thus, the U.N. has officially warned of an imminent humanitarian crisis inside of the already war-torn Libya. Meanwhile, the refugee situation in Syria - and by extension Turkey - is not yet on the same scale as the crisis in Libya in terms of sheer numbers, but it is equally as worrying for a number of reasons. Refugees from Jisr al-Shughur, Syria, report that that town has been razed and it is now being reported that Syrian tanks and troops are moving to other northern Syrian towns to crush dissent which is increasing the flow of Syrian refugees into southern Turkey. Meanwhile, Turkey has erected its fifth camp as there are now over 10,000 Syrian refugees who have entered the country officially and are being assisted by the Turkish government. There is no estimate on the number of refugees that have entered unofficially.
24
2.6. Questions a Resolution must answer

How can the UN and the international community gauge and more importantly, gain a better insight into the oppression that women and children have been subject to because of the events of the Arab Spring? What guarantees does the international community have that the political change manifest within the nations having gone through with the events of the Arab Spring will lead to adequate provision of womens rights, who have participated with the same zeal and in the same capacities as men within these conflicts? What can the international community, and more importantly, the UN do to ensure that this political change also translated into a substantial change for the better for women? In Egypt and Libya, where dictatorial regimes have already been overthrown, what can be done to ensure that the new governmental and civil institutions setups are representative of women as well? How can the UN introduce a setup that guarantees the sustainability of all changes aimed at women emancipation in these countries? What is the minimum criterion, upon which any change proposed to favour women, must be based upon, with particular emphasis on the new constitutions and governments in Libya and Syria? What does the UN structural framework propose to protect children from manifest violence and killing at the hands of forces using lethal force and brutality? What can be done to ensure the protection of children rights, as mentioned in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, in these Arab nations, especially in Libya and Syria? How can the process of rehabilitating and assimilating these children back into their normal lives be facilitated by the UN, with particular emphasis on education? In light of the refugee and the internally displaced people crisis faced, what needs to be done to ensure the protection of women and children in particular?
2.7. Bibliography
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vivian-norris-de-montaigu/women-and-the-reality-of_b_2323377.html http://www.economist.com/node/21532256 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shahnaz-taplinchinoy/why-women-must-be-at-the-_b_2176396.html http://www.dw.de/arab-spring-revolutions-dont-reach-women/a-16403996 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/11/opinion/sunday/women-fight-to-define-the-arabspring.html?_r=0 http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012/09/24/arab-spring-reforms-still-leavingwomen-out-in-the-cold/57826430/1 http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/06/23/the_arab_spring_s_looming_refugee_crisis http://www.france24.com/en/20121230-11-children-killed-syria-bombardments-watchdog http://www.unicef.org.uk/Latest/News/syria-violence-reports/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19709041
25
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/09/19/children_of_the_revolution_libya http://childvictimsofwar.org.uk/get-informed/libya-2/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9295268/Massacred-Syrian-childrenwere-bound-before-being-shot.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2014236/Libya-Children-young-7-trained-fight-Gaddafi.html http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/laj_61299.html http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/06/12/12178489-un-children-tortured-used-as-humanshields-in-syria?lite http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/09/25/syria-save-the-children-report.html
2.8. Recommended readings and research

The BBC profiles on Syria and Libya The Arab Spring for Women; Gender, Representation and Middle East politics, University of Wisconsin, Sjoberg, L. UN Convention on the Rights of the Child CEDAW (Committee on the Elimination of all discrimination against Women) reports on political change for women in Libya, October 2011 The Universal Declaration on Human Rights
26

Study Guide SOCHUM LGSMUN 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Study Guide SOCHUM LGSMUN 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

LGSMUN 2013 Social, Cultural and Humanitarian Committee (SOCHUM) Study Guide

Introduction to the Committee

The Committees Mandate

The Committee at LGSMUN 2013

Topic A: International Religious Legislation

1.2.1. Freedom of Speech

1.2.2. Freedom of Religion/Belief

1.2.4. Why shouldnt religion have the same protection as race?

1.2.5. What is the United Nations Defamation of Religions resolution?

1.3. Defamation of Religion what does it constitute?

1.4. The role of the UN

1.5. Case Studies

1.6. Questions a Resolution must answer

1.8. Recommended readings and research

Topic B: The Treatment of Women and Children in the Arab Spring

2.1.3. Legislation in Syria

Image courtesy of The Economist, October 2011

2.4. The role of the UN with regards to the treatment of minors

2.5. The refugee crisis created by events of the Arab Spring

2.6. Questions a Resolution must answer

2.8. Recommended readings and research

You might also like