A Need to Tread Carefully

In light of my recent post on the banning of veils in France, I thought I would write a follow-up piece on the far reaching consequences of this ban, or potential ban. It is more than just an issue of human rights.

It seems that in Pakistan, Conservative Sunni activism has ‘reemerged in the heart of Pakistan’. The Washington Post reports that “In recent weeks, even as conservative Sunnis have targeted Muslim minorities, they have also launched a high-profile campaign against Western European laws and practices that they allege are anti-Muslim. They have held peaceful rallies in downtown Lahore, met with journalists and sent delegations to the provincial legislature. Their movement opposes recent bans on veils in Denmark, a prohibition on new minaret and the republishing of controversial.” 

While I do not seek to address this movement, I do mean to insinuate that these actions by Western governments are forms of discrimination against minority Muslim communities. Moreover, they can potentially feed Islamic extremism.  

"We are against terrorism and the Taliban, and we don't want any conflict with other religions, but the West is playing with our emotions and trying to destroy the peace. They are the real terrorists," said Asim Makhdoom, a cleric from the Jamiat-e-Islami party, who preached against the cartoons and other European actions at a mosque one recent Friday.

"We believe this is the right time for Muslims across Pakistan and around the world to stand up and show they will not tolerate disrespect," Khalid Hafiz, a political adviser to cleric Hafiz Saeed, the spiritual leader of Jamaat-ud-Dawa, said in a recent interview; the group is affiliated with the anti-Indian insurgent militia known as Lashkar-e-Taiba and was listed as a terrorist organization by the United States and banned by Pakistan several years ago.

According to the Washington Post, “In raising alarms against anti-Muslim discrimination abroad, Jamaat-ud-Dawa and its allies have chosen a distant cause that resonates with Pakistanis nationwide. People here were outraged when a Danish newspaper first published the offending cartoons several years ago, and a TV talk show recently featured two veiled women calling for European governments to "respect civil liberties" and curb "Islamophobia”.”

There is a need to tread carefully.  

A Review of 2009: The Human Rights Council - 12th Special Session on the Human Rights Situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem

The Human Rights Council’s 12^th Special Session on the Human Rights Situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem took place on 16 October 2009. Ms. Navanethem Pillay opened the Session reiterating her support for the fact-finding mission and expressing her dismay over the “culture of impunity [that] continues to prevail in the occupied territories and in Israel”. “It is [thus] necessary to carry out prompt and effective investigations in compliance with international standards.” “Human rights are not obstacles to peace, but the preconditions to trust and on which durable peace can be built… Addressing impunity for human rights and the humanitarian crisis is essential in order to carry on the peace process.” 

Israel strongly rejected the gathering of the meeting stating, “Such meetings like today should only be called in case of emergencies. Everyone knows today’s meeting is not about human rights but the abuse and integrity of this organization.” The representative continued, accusing the Goldstone Report as biased and flawed and “wrong in spirit” and as ignoring Israel’s right to self-defense. “Action here today will set back hopes for peace – it will not be a special session of this international organization but dialogue that will offer clear benefits and mutual trust. The only beneficiary of today’s session is Hamas and their allies… The political weapons proposed here today have nothing to do with human rights.”

Palestine welcomed the Goldstone report and OHCHR, and called to putting an end to violations and to respecting human rights. “We called this meeting to address the grave situation, submitting a draft resolution that condemns [current Israeli] practices”, which violate international law, human rights law, and humanitarian law. The representative called to putting an end to these practices and to respecting human rights.

Member States responses were for the most part linear. Member States condemned Israel’s continuous military campaign and outright violations of international law. They maintained their support for the Goldstone Report, called upon both parties to adhere to international humanitarian law and respect all international norms, and stressed the need for Israel and Palestine to enter into serious peace negotiations as soon as possible. 

A Special Report by an Anonymous Author: The rights of air travellers: the right to privacy or the right to safety?

Known as Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) scanners, the attempted attack on Christmas day by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab has reconfirmed the need for increased security in airports. While some may view the security measures in place as sufficient, clearly they are not. The question, however, arises as to the thin line between assuring passenger safety and safeguarded personal privacy rights. Passengers using Heathrow and Manchester airports, soon Birmingham as well, have been told that from now on they will not be allowed to board their flights if they refuse to submit to full-body scans. The American Transportation Security Administration (TSA) will also be utilizing this technology, which only takes 15-30 per scan.  

I can understand how some may view this as infringement on their personal rights as I too was weary at first. As a young lady, the thought of stepping through a scanner which provides a clear image of my body was not pleasing to say the least. The thought of people standing around viewing my person was rather humiliating.

However, upon further consideration and research, I discovered that people will be selected at random for these scans, just as you can be selected for a random baggage or body check. There are two types of scanners on trial: 1) “backscatter” technology which is conducted with low level x-rays and 2) “millimetre wave” technology which uses radio waves to create a 3-D image. If you are considered “suspect,” secondary screening will involve chemical swabs to test for explosives.

The system uses a pair of security officers. The one working the machine never sees the image, which appears on a computer screen behind closed doors elsewhere; and the remotely located officer who sees the image never sees the passenger. As further protection, a passenger’s face is blurred and the image as a whole “resembles a fuzzy negative,” said TSA’s officials. The officers monitoring images aren’t allowed to bring cameras, cell phones or any recording device into the room, and the computers have been programmed so they have “zero storage capability” and images are “automatically deleted”.

I do understand the concerns that people have that this infringes on their rights as prescribed by the Human Rights Act, however I think we can all agree that the right to safety is foremost. I believe it is the right of every passenger to have the highest security assurance and if you disagree, then perhaps air travel is not for you. Personally, I would rather step through a scanner, pretend nothing is happening, and go merrily on my way to my destination then sit on the flight worrying the someone on my plane is sitting there with an explosive device in his/her underpants. Read more here.

*In reference to concerns that these images will breach The Protection of Children Act of 1978, people are required to be 18 and over, until this issue is resolved.

*To those worried about the potential physical harm of these scanners, I am not certain whether there is difference between them and the many scanners/detectors that we already have to pass through.

Gaza: The Right to Life and The Right to Work

The right to life is recognized as the most fundamental and basic of human rights. Every human being has the right to life. No one should be deprived of his or her life.

The promotion and protection of the right to life is no longer considered to be a matter exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of a State. It is also a matter of international concern. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”. The right to life is also entrenched in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which asserts that “Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law.”

The right to work is also an inalienable right of all human beings. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection. This fundamental right it recognized in several international legal instruments. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment” and “Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worth of human dignity”. This right is also upheld in the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights.

So what about Gaza? What about their right to life, to work, to survive?

In Gaza, fishermen risk their lives for survival. A growing number of impoverished fishermen are risking crossing the Gaza-Egypt maritime border to buy fresh fish from the country’s nearby port cities and Egyptian fishermen out at sea.

Israel and Egypt sealed their borders with the Palestinian coastal enclave after Hamas seized power in Gaza in June 2007. The ensuing economic blockade, which bans all commercial imports and exports to and from the territory, also prohibits Gaza’s 3,500 fishermen from traveling beyond 5.5km, down from the 37m limit stipulated by the Oslo Accords.

According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, approximately seventy percent of Gaza’s annual sardine catch if found outside the Israeli-imposed fishing zone. Moreover, the other side of the barrier, which is heavily patrolled by Israeli warships, is also home to at least a dozen other varieties of fish and seafood.

According to the United Nations, the industry makes up 2-4% of the Palestinian gross domestic product (GDP).

“The fishermen do not feel at all safe at sea,” said Stephane Beytrison, the head of the Red Cross field office here. “Not all of them have GPS [global positioning systems], and in some cases even that doesn’t make a difference. They can be shot when they are three miles out or just two, they never know.”

“If our sea were open, our fish would be better,” Fathi Sayadi, a fisherman, said. “But in Egypt, they have access to all the things we don’t. I have four children and my brother has two. What can we do?”

“If our sea were open, our fish would be better,” Fathi Sayadi said. “But in Egypt, they have access to all the things we don’t. I have four children and my brother has two. What can we do?”

The fishermen buy the Egyptian fish for what they say are good prices in Egyptian pounds, then sell it at a higher price on the Gaza market. They claim to make about 500 shekels (USD $134) in profit with each trip, which goes towards fuel and paying the salaries of workers they hire to transport the fish to market.

In comparison, the average monthly salary of a Gaza fisherman is just 250 shekels (USD $67.13), down from 1,300 shekels (USD $349.09) before the blockade, according to the Red Cross.

“Isn’t it ridiculous that fishermen are required to buy fish from other fishermen, in another country?” said Abu Nidal, an elderly fisherman whom many of the Gaza City seamen consider to be their de-facto leader. “We used to export our fish. But now we import – and we barely do even that.”

The head of the fishing department at Gaza’s ministry of agriculture, who asked to be referred to as Abu Yusuf because of his affiliation with the Fatah-led government in Ramallah, estimates between 15 per cent and 20 per cent of the fish in Gaza’s market comes from Egypt, whether through the tunnels or from fishermen making the risky trip across the border. A further five per cent is imported from Israel, and the market works against other local fishermen as a result, officials here say.

“If they don’t want us to go to Egypt, then open the sea,” Abu Nidal said. “End the siege and just let us fish, so that we can live.”

Read Erin Cunningham’s Gaza Fishermen Risk Lives for Survival.

A Review of 2009, The Forum on Minority Issues

The Forum of Minority Issues was established by Human Rights Council resolution 6/15 of 28 September 2007 to provide a platform for promoting dialogue and cooperation on issues pertaining to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities. The Forum meets annually for two working days, discussion following a particular theme.

This year’s Forum convened on 12 and 13 November, focusing on "Minorities and Effective Political Participation" and around 3 core elements in particular: identification of challenges and problems facing minorities and states; identification of good practices in relation to minorities and political participation; consideration of opportunities, initiatives and solutions. The Forum considered current practices and ways to increase the effective participation of minorities in policy- and decision-making processes and institutions: national and local parliaments, “minority parliaments, advisory or consultative bodies. It also discussed possible institutions/bodies that could address obstacles to the participation of minorities in political life, such as a minorities ombudsperson or dedicated branch on minorities in the national human rights institution, a dedicated ministry, a dedicated parliamentary committee, parliamentary outreach to minority communities, and the media.

The independent expert on minority issues, Ms. Gay McDougall, guided the work of the Forum. Ms. McDougall maintained that the right to effective participation recognizes the fact that the participation of minorities in various areas of life is essential for the development of a truly inclusive and just society. Effective participation should give minorities a stake in society. Creating the conditions for the effective participation of minorities should thus be considered by states to be an integral aspect of good governance. “The right to effective participation includes participation in political decision-making at both the local and national levels. In addition, persons belonging to minorities should be given the means to participate effectively in the public, cultural, religious, social and economic spheres of their societies". The human rights principle of non-discrimination is additionally crucial. Discrimination is a key cause of the widespread marginalization of minorities in societies worldwide. “Discrimination which inhibits the political participation of minorities may manifest itself in, among others: a type of electoral system which negatively affects minority representation, political parties which are adverse to minority issues and minority membership, widespread prejudice among the electorate which punishes parties willing to include minority candidate or voice minority issues, media which are hostile to minority concerns and participation". To this effect, the effectiveness of the political participation of minorities must constantly be measured at all levels of society in order to ensure that is real and meaningful.  

Participants heard from a broad range of independent experts, NGOs and Member States. Among these experts was Ms. Graciela J. Dixon, attorney and former Chief Justice of the Corte Suprema de Justicia de Panama, who spoke on “Basic requirements for effective political participation and suggestions on concrete steps to advance minority political participation,” and Mr. Joe Frans, former chair of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, who spoke on the report on the Black European Summit. In order to promote States accountability, Ms. Dixon recommended the establishment of a qualification system, ensuring political participation at all levels, to promote cooperation and development programs and ensure that States are following UN standards. States should also be urged to report on the policies and actions taken on minority political participation. In addition, Ms. Dixon recommended the establishment of an international observatory as well as a periodical to register the compliance of human rights principles. Moreover, to ensure minority political participation, she suggested an assessment by the Working Group on Minority Issues. Mr. Frans spoke about the growth of racist and populist parties, which have had an impact on mainstream political parties and therefore on parties in general. He contended that there is an ongoing triangular shift on policy by mainstream political parties in order to minimize the political space. This is having a negative impact on minority participation and representation in Europe. He asserted that there is a need to focus on real participation and to move toward an inclusive society. Mr. Frans recommended that States take active measures, and adopt a code of conduct as well as policy guidelines in dealing with extreme right parties.

The outcome of the Forum will be thematic recommendations that will be included in the report by the independent expert on minority issues to be presented to the Human Rights Council at its thirteenth session in March 2010

A Review of 2009, OHCHR Expert Workshop on the Right of Peoples to Peace,

OHCHR's Expert Meeting on the Right of Peoples to Peace took place 15-16 December. This workshop on right to peace was formed at the request of Human Rights Council resolution A/HRC/11/4, entitled ˝Promotion of the rights of peoples to peace ̏. The Resolution requested that OHCHR convene a workshop before February 2010 with the participation of experts from regions of the world in order further clarify the content and scope of this right; propose measures that raise awareness of the importance of realizing this right; and suggest concrete actions to mobilize States, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations in the promotion of the right of peoples to peace.

Ms. Kyung-wha Kang, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, opened the meeting, stressing the intricate linkage between peace and human rights. ˝Respect for human rights is the foundation of freedom, peace and justice in the world. Peoples of our planet have the right to peace."

Various distinguished individuals spoke on the panels, whose topics ranged from the ‘different dimensions of the right of people to peace' to ‘measure and actions to raise awareness and to promote the right of peoples to peace'. On the ‘Different dimensions of the right of peoples to peace', Ms. Vera Gowlland, Honorary Professor, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, 1999 General Assembly resolution on the culture of peace; however, the value of these assertions depends on the subsequent practices of states of the international community. The International Court of Justice has also given great weight to these resolutions. That said, the right to peace is not clear in and of itself, although certain elements are being clarified in certain pronouncements. asserted that in recent years there has been a proliferation of a soft instrument proclaiming the right to peace. In 1984, a General Assembly declaration pronounced that peoples of our planet have a sacred right to peace.


Mr. Antonio Augusto Cancado Trindade, Judge, International Court of Justice, opened the second day of the meeting, proclaiming that, although it remains an invincible idea, the right to peace as an ideal that has not yet been achieved. ˝The 1984 Declaration on the rights of peoples to peace has not yet delivered a significant projection. ̏ That said, the right to peace is deeply rooted in human consciousness. ˝The time has come to codify peace. But, how? We do not live in a rational world. The right to peace has not had the same effect as the right to development. ̏


Continuing on the ‘Right of peoples from a human rights perspective', Mr. William Schabas, Director, Irish Centre for Human Rights, National University of Ireland, stressed the fragility of the debate on the right to peace. ˝Some question if this is the right place to discuss the right to peace. ̏ For instance, at the Human Rights Council, there were those who voted against adopting resolution 11/4 on the right of peoples to peace. ˝The right to peace is undervalued and does not yet have a proper place. This, however, does not mean that it is absent, but that it is underdeveloped. ̏

The Expert Workshop on the Right of Peoples to Peace closed successfully, and the outcome will be presented at the 14^th Session of the Human Rights Council in June 2010.

France may ban women from wearing veils in public - freedom of rights?

French women could be banned from wearing the full Islamic veil in public under legislation proposed by Nicolas Sarkozy's ruling party. Sarkozy has said that the burka is "not welcome" in France.

According to The Guardian, Jean-Francois Cope parliamentary leader of the right wing majority UMP, said a law banning face-covering in public places would be submitted to parliament next year. Citing concerns over women's freedom and 'public order', he said a total ban was justified by growing fears of equality in France, home to Europe's largest Muslim population. Mr Cope said he would put forward a bill this month banning the wearing of the veil in public as a means of defending France against 'extremists'. 


Debate about the burka or niqab and its compatibility with the Republican values of freedom, secularism and gender equality has reportedly been raging in France since Sarkozy called a parliamentary commission to investigate it in June. 


Recently, France's opposition Socalists have come out against the law banning the burka - even though they remain firmly opposed to the garment.


To play devil's advocate, could it not be argued that the law itself would be infringing on women's rights and freedom? I refer to those who choose to wear the burka.

The Right to Express Your Sexuality

A new bill before the Ugandan parliament, which proposes a death penalty for “aggravated homosexuality” and “serial offenders”, demonstrates that many nations still impose harsh penalties for public expressions of homosexuality. A sentence of life imprisonment will be imposed for touching a person with homosexual intent. Membership in gay organizations, advocacy of gay human rights and the provision of condoms or safer sex advice to gay people will result in seven years jail for “promoting” homosexuality. Failing to report violators to the police within 24 hours would incur three years behind bars. The new legislation will also apply to Ugandans who commit these "crimes" while living abroad, even in countries where such behavior is not a criminal offense.

Only a handful of nations (the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, France, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Canada, New Zealand, and the UK) ensure full equality and protection under the law for LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) persons. No international human-rights convention that provides for the sexual rights as human rights and equality of the LGBT community exists, a fact that prevents more progressive nations from bringing pressure to bear on the African and Islamic states where homophobia is enshrined as law.

Stand up for LGBT rights!

Read more here.

Write for Rights – Join the Global Write-a-thon!

Promote freedom and human rights by joining Amnesty International's annual Global Write-a-thon, the world's largest letter writing event!

 

This global action marks the International Human Rights Day on 10 December, bringing people together from all over the world to make a difference in the lives of prisoners of conscience, human rights defenders, victims of torture and other individuals at risk.

Use the proven power of writing letters and get involved!

Linking Human Rights and Migrant Empowerment for Development

There is a linkage between human rights, migrant empowerment and development. UNDP Report 2009 makes this point, defining empowerment as “the freedom to act in pursuit of personal goals and well-being”.  It suggests that migrants through movement can enhance development. “However, the reception of the host country obviously matters, especially when migrants face local hostility.” In this way, one of the key obstacles is persistent anti-migrant sentiments and discriminatory practices, enforced by beliefs, policies, ect., which can criminalize migrants. This has been exacerbated by the global economic crisis and rampant unemployment. Migrants are viewed as a second-class work force, against whom the local workers must compete. This perspective must be addressed, whether real or imagined. Migrants can be more productive and contribute more if they are not excluded. To this effect, international treaties must provide guidance and the rights respective to migrant status (to education, health, right to work, and such) must be respected. It is the duty of national human rights institutions to ensure that the rights of migrants are implemented as they are currently neither implemented nor respected.  

At the Palais des Nations in Geneva, we had the pleasure of attending an Expert Seminar on Linking Human Rights and Migrant Empowerment for Development.

One of the panelists was Mr. Abdelhamid El Jamri,Committee on Protection of Rights of Migrant Workers. He spoke of the need for migrants to be supported at the socio-economic level. There is currently a dual approach, a compromise between the political and economic position in a host country, to temporary/secular migration; the political, which wants to reduce migration inflows, versus the economic, which seeks to develop to fill in gaps of manpower. This is a natural phenomenon, which needs to be taken into account. Migrants need to have access to their rights, and these rights must be strengthened. Those who wish to return temporarily to their country of origin should be able to do so without fear of losing residence if they are outside the country for too long; they should be able to go back. We need to help create a balance as well as assist countries in better managing migration. Mr. El Jamri recommended that host countries work together with other countries for a positive impact on development. He calls on states to form a partnership on migrants and to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers as well as the two ILO treaties and conventions; we need to spread good practices. Strengthening rights is the best way to tackle illegal migration.  

Another panelist was Mr. Ibrahim Awad, the Director of the International Migration Programme, International Labour Office (ILO). He spoke about the legal framework and how this process has resulted in integration, as well as the need for provisions in conventions, conventions specific to migrants, and gender conventions specific to migrants.

A third panelist was Ms. Angela Li Rosi,voluntary repatriation, integration in first country of asylum, and resettlement. She stated that there is a need to focus on integration because integration starts when a person arrives; they need access to social and economic rights. In this way some key challenges currently faced are the reception and integration of refugees, and the integration of 3^rd nationals, including refugees, as a priority. Moreover, some key obstacles facing migrants are the lack of knowledge of local language and culture, and discriminatory and negative attitudes within host communities; refugees are excluded from bilateral arrangements with third countries on access to the labor market and asylum seeks have limited access to rights. Ms. Li Rosi recommended that the media be used as a tool for positive social integration. the Senior Policy Adviser for Policy Development and Evaluation Service, Executive Office, UNHCR. She spoke of the inclusion, protection, and acceptance of refugees and others of concern in the host society, who have a long journey to full enjoyment of rights. She mentioned three lasting solutions: 

To read more see here:

The Rights of Migrant Workers 

UNDP Report 2009  

Global Forum on Migration & Development, Athens 2009 
Migration and Development  

Switzerland to confront 'suicide tourism'

The Swiss government’s outline of the details of proposals to ban or severely restrict assisted suicide as part of plants to tackle “suicide tourism” falls back to the Euthanasia debate. In Switzerland euthanasia is illegal; however, physicians assisting suicide has been made legal since 1918. Switzerland has an unusual position regarding assisted suicide. Even non-physicians can perform it. Essentially, even though euthanasia is illegal, it is legally condoned.

The Swiss are currently looking at two draft proposals on assisted suicide. As part of the proposals, patients would have to provide two separate medical opinions proving that they have a terminal illness and are expected only to have months to live. Those who are chronically or mentally ill would find it more difficult to get help in ending their lives. Justice Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumf contends that organizations involved in assisted suicide were “testing the boundaries of the law” and that death by this method should not become a “profit-driven business”. In a statement, the justice ministry said that “suicide must only be a last resort” and that it was committed to protecting human life. Her argument may be regarded in view of those ‘Against’ euthanasia; opponents typically raise the point that euthanasia will lead to its misuse. ‘Opponents’, on the other hand, would argue that the decision of the patients should be accepted, as it is their right to decide. 

To read more see here:

Euthanasia and Human Rights 
Right to Life 
"Swiss to tackle 'suicide tourism'" 

Contemporary Forms of Slavery

Mrs. Gulnara Shahinian, the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, including its causes and consequences to the Human Rights Council during the 12th Session of the Human Rights Council in October (2009). 

In her report, Mrs. Shahinian contended that slavery exists all over the world and that it continues to persist and evolve. Causes for bonded labor have not changed the times. Discrimination, cost, social status, labor and such are still causes of bonded labor and further enhance the vulnerability of the poor. Forced labor not only occurs in trafficking. This is only 20%; 80% is still not addressed. Given the gravity of violations, which frequently result in forced labor, it is important that all forms of slavery defined in the slavery conventions be given their due prominence. Bonded labor affects women, children, and men in different ways. For example, it affects men more in the construction sphere and women in large-scale agriculture. Moreover, forced labor particularly affects women and girls in forced labor for economic exploitation. It is necessary to take specific action to address bonded labor as a separate crime. Mrs. Shahinian highlighted the need to create awareness and develop laws that specifically target bonded labor, as despite the illegality of bonded labor, there is a lack of international enforcement. As a consequence, due to such things as illegal contract and astronomical interest rates, a person in bonded labor is bonded for life.

Mrs. Shahinian visited Haiti to assess the challenges. The poorest country in the Americas, plagued by political instability, crisis and natural disasters, Haiti has a long-established survival strategy by those in the rural area. They send their children, termed "restavek children", to urban areas in hope that they will send back money; this does not entail any transaction between families and the children. The result is the economic exploitation of children, as the host family expects the child to work much harder, and the flagrant disregard for their life. With the introduction of intermediaries and agents, the process has become increasingly commercialized. If left unaddressed, it will lead to an increased number of children engaged in this practice. It is important to address this issue. Assuring human rights based on the development of society is critical to the sustainability of peace. Poverty and social exclusion are at the heart of poverty, and thus it is crucial that the MDGs be realized, as they will have a significant impact on this issue. Strong political will, commitment and collective action are needed now, especially at the MDG goal date nears. 


To read more see here: 

Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery
UN Voluntary Fund on Slavery