The UN General Assembly Human Rights Council on 29 September 2016 adopted a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.29) which established a mandate for a Special Rapporteur on the Right to Development. The draft of the resolution was presented by Venezuela on behalf of the member states of the Non-aligned Movement and China, and was adopted by a vote of 34 in favour, two against and 11 abstentions. The Council decided to appoint, for a period of three years, a Special Rapporteur on the right to development, whose mandate will include: to contribute to the promotion, protection and fulfilment of the right to development in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and other internationally agreed outcomes of 2015; to engage and support efforts to mainstream the right to development among various United Nations bodies, development agencies, international development, financial and trade institutions, and to submit proposals aimed at strengthening the revitalized global partnership for sustainable development from the perspective of the right to development; to contribute to the work of the Working Group with a view to supporting the accomplishment of its overall mandate, taking into account, inter alia, the deliberations and recommendations of the Working Group while avoiding any duplication; to submit any specific study by the Human Rights Council in accordance with its mandate; to submit an annual report to the Human Rights Council and to the General Assembly covering all activities relating to the mandate. In his remarks introducing the draft proposal, Ambassador Mr. Jorge Valero (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela), on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), recalled that in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action on the Right to Development, the Council committed to elevate the right to development to the same level as other human rights and fundamental freedoms. South Africa’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations in Geneva, Ambassador Nozipho Joyce Mxakato-Diseko, speaking on behalf of the African Group expressed the support of the African continent for the draft resolution proposed by NAM and China. Ambassador Mxakato-Diseko underscored that 2016 was a crucial year for the start of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Values, Policies and Rights
Innovative and agile cities are better placed to solve major global challenges than national governments – in thrall to the momentum of the last century – but the fight must start now, argues Barcelona’s first female mayor. Colau argues that all the major global challenges – climate change, the economy, inequality, the very future of democracy – will be solved in cities. If nations want to succeed with their policies, cities must be counted as serious actors on the global stage. She argues that national governments are hostages to the momentum of the previous century – but that’s not the real world any more. We live in a world that functions by networking, by faster and more agile contact between cities. Colau notes that it is not possible to talk about a just, sustainable, equitable or inclusive city without speaking about the right to the city - a model of urban development that includes all citizens. She argues that the reference to it in the UN’s New Urban Agenda document ratified at Habitat III in Quito this week could be more ambitious. However it is necessary to recognise the problems overcome just to get this far. She comments that some global powers such as the United States and China resisted it completely; they didn’t want the right to the city in the declaration at all. Thanks to popular mobilisation in Latin America and in some European countries, this political movement has won its place on the agenda – and she notes it as a significant achievement. For the right to the city to become real, however, needs action to transform it into concrete policies and regulations. Colau notes that the most important tests will come after the summit finishes – when we find out whether all these statements can translate into commitments that create positive solutions for urban citizens.
Habitat III – the United Nation’s global conference on the future of cities – came to a close in late October. About 30,000 people gathered in Quito, Ecuador, to discuss the key issues facing cities today and sign off on the New Urban Agenda – the global strategy which will guide urban development over the next 20 years. The author describes the event: Efforts to make the conference inclusive – it was free and anyone could register – materialised in a big jamboree of all kinds of people interested in urban affairs (as well as complaints about long queues). The overall message of the conference emphasised the need to address social, economic and material inequalities in cities and urban areas. Yet - he notes- international experts often appeared oblivious to the enormous progress that the poorest urban communities have made to organise themselves and finance their futures. The main outcome of Habitat III was that UN nation states agreed on the New Urban Agenda (NUA): a non-binding document, which will guide policies over the next 20 years with the goal of making cities safer, resilient and sustainable and their amenities more inclusive. The NUA itself emerged from a consultative process, whereby UN-Habitat collected the inputs of a diverse community of urban scholars, leaders, planners and activists. Its key message was “leaving no one behind”. Its vision for the future of cities was one where aspirations of prosperity and sustainable development are linked to a desire for equality. Yet the document did not escape criticism: How far did it grassroots perspectives? How far did the consensual approach and redrafting exclude key issues? How will it be put into practice? Some proposed, for example, that 20% to 25% of global finance for development – in instruments such as the Green Climate Fund – should be allocated directly to cities. The author calls the consensus around the “right to the city” – an idea championed by Ecuador and Brazil – historical. The “right to the city” generally refers to the capacity of urban citizens to influence processes of urban development, and make a city they want to live in. Social movements promoted this right to denounce urban processes that generate injustices, such as gentrification, privatisation of public spaces, forced evictions and the mistreatment of urban refugees. But as it is not explicitly recognised as a universal human right, the NUA merely encourages governments to enshrine it in their laws.
In this paper, the authors assess the evolution of African Union policies related to women's and children's health, and analyse how these policies are prioritised and framed. It used a document review of all African Union policies developed from 1963 to 2010, focusing specifically on policies that explicitly mention health. The findings were discussed with key actors to identify policy implications. With over 220 policies in total, peace and security was the most common AU policy topic. Social affairs and other development issues became more prominent in the 1990s. The number of policies that mentioned health rose steadily over the years (with 1 policy mentioning health in 1963 to 7 in 2010). This change was catalysed by factors such as: a favourable shift in AU priorities and systems towards development issues, spurred by the transition from the Organisation of African Unity to the African Union; the mandate of the African Commission on Human and People's Rights; health-related advocacy initiatives, such as the Campaign for the Accelerated Reduction of Maternal Mortality in Africa (CARMMA); action and accountability requirements arising from international human rights treaties, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), and new health-funding mechanisms, such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. Prioritisation of women's and children's health issues in AU policies has been framed primarily by human rights, advocacy and accountability considerations, more that by frameworks looking at their economic impact. The authors suggest that more effective prioritisation of women's and children's health in African Union policies could be supported by widening the policy framework to integrate their economic benefit and strengthening the evidence base of policies and strengthening multi-stakeholder advocacy for them.
Amidst the many challenges facing the next WHO Director-General, the authors argue that the new WHO head should prioritise the right to health. They call for leadership on a Framework Convention on Global Health (FCGH), based in the right to health and aimed at national and global health equity. The treaty would, they argue, enhance accountability, transparency, and civil society participation and protect the right to health in trade, investment, climate change, and other international regimes, while catalysing governments to institutionalise the right to health at community through to national levels. With the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control having served as a proof of concept, the FCGH would be an innovative treaty finding solutions to overcome global health failings in accountability, equality, financing, and inter-sectoral coherence, with a national and global health financing framework. They raise options for reaching beyond the health sector with right to health assessments, public health participation in developing international agreements, and responsibility for all sectors for improving health outcomes. Finally they propose that the FCGH would reinvigorate WHO’s global health leadership, breathing new life into its founding principles and bringing badly-needed reforms to the institution, such as community participation, new priorities favouring social determinants of health, and a culture of transparency and accountability.
On 21 September 2016 the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted the political declaration on antimicrobial resistance. Its adoption provides recognition of the critical nature of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) at the highest political level. It recognises the World Health Organisation (WHO) Global Action Plan on AMR as the blue print of action. It also acknowledges that the lack of access to health services and antimicrobial medicines continues to affect more people than resistance, as a major challenge for developing countries. The document clearly states that research and development efforts should be guided by need and by the principles of affordability, effectiveness, efficiency and equity as well as be de-linked from the price and volume of sales. There are two calls for action in the text. The first one calls upon the WHO “together with Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), to finalise a global development and stewardship framework. ” Preliminary discussions on this framework have taken place in Geneva at the WHO Headquarters in early 2016 but this call for action gives an explicit mandate to continue the negotiations that will define and structure how this framework would look like. The second call for action requests the Secretary-General to establish an ad hoc interagency coordination group co-chaired by the Executive Office of the Secretary-General and the WHO. During the negotiations for the political declaration civil society groups that were following the process in New York told Third World Network that it was necessary that the UN, with all its agencies, participated in creating actions within their mandates to complement and support the WHO leadership in this issue due to the fact that AMR is interconnected with many other aspects beyond human health. According to several civil society organisations that attended the panel, while the declaration is a good step and recognition at the highest level of this critical issue the declaration had few commitments on the mobilisation of funds to support developing countries. It did not make specific commitments in the animal health sector. The declaration calls for a report back in 2018 at the UNGA and hopefully some of the commitments discussed in this meeting can be truly realised.
The authors argue that leaving no one behind is the moral issue of our age, and is at the heart the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). One specific goal is ‘ending poverty, in all its forms, everywhere’, but the SDGs also aim to tackle marginalisation. The SDG outcome document specifies that the goals should be met for all segments of society, with an endeavour to reach those furthest behind first. Now the focus is on implementation, particularly at the national level. This report makes the case for early action, and quantifies its benefits. The report outlines the actions that governments can take in the first 1,000 days of the SDGs to respond to what poor people want and to deliver for the most marginalised people and groups. The evidence shows that achieving the SDGs and the ambition to leave no one behind will become far more difficult the longer governments delay. The report concludes that early action is critical for the achievement of the SDGs.
This meeting, organized under the auspices of the Network of Africa Parliamentary Committees on Health (NEAPACOH), and organised by PPD Aro, focused on implementation of regional and international commitments including the International Congress on Population and Development, Program of Action, the Maputo Plan of Action, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), and the FP2020 commitments, among others. The meeting provided a platform for building capacity and raising awareness of members of parliament on sustainable development. At the meeting parliamentarians from across the continent assessed progress made, challenges and lessons learned on achieving the country commitments made at its previous 2014 NEAPACOH meeting, built a common understanding of the challenges and opportunities for sexual and reproductive health in the post-2015 development agenda, shared experiences and innovative practices on the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, to enhance accountability, political leadership and stewardship for implementation over the coming 12 months. By the end of the meeting, a resolution (The Kampala Call for Action) was adopted by participants, on their commitments to address these issues.
This new report by the Center for Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD). “Facing Uganda’s Law on Abortion: Experiences from Women and Service Providers” raises that an unclear abortion law in Uganda means that women and adolescents seek unsafe abortions and are vilified by their families and communities, with doctors and health workers who provide legal post-abortion care being arrested. This report highlights experiences and perspectives of individuals who have been affected by or have dealt with abortion. It includes interviews with women and girls who ended pregnancies, as well as doctors, nurses, health worker, lawyers, police and community members. Abortion in Uganda is legal in limited circumstances, yet approximately 85,000 women each year receive treatment for complications from unsafe abortion and an additional 65,000 women experience complications but do not seek medical treatment. The CEHURD report also draws on a research report by the Center for Reproductive Rights in 2012 on Uganda’s laws and policies on termination of pregnancy that found that the laws and policies are more expansive than most believe, and that Uganda has ample opportunity to increase access to safe abortion services.
The right to health has been enshrined in a number of core international and regional human rights treaties, to which WHO African Region Member States are signatories. This therefore imposes an obligation on them to make every possible effort using available resources to respect, protect, fulfil and promote the right to health of their citizens. This study analysed key issues and challenges affecting the realisation of the right to health in African countries. A survey questionnaire was sent by email to the then 46 Member States in the African Region through the WHO Country Representatives, and explored legal, policy and institutional aspects that affect the realisation of the right to health and the main health related human rights issues, and challenges in implementing the right to health. Twenty-five (54%) countries responded. The main findings were that all countries were signatories to at least one human rights treaty that recognises the right to health; all countries had national legislation touching on aspects of the right to health but only 12 countries (48%) had policies or strategies for mainstreaming human rights in healthcare. On issues affecting the realisation of the right to health: 88% identified access to health care services, medical products, and technologies; 52% identified inadequate financing for health; 28% cited marginalisation, stigma and discrimination of some groups and communities; and 24% cited gender-related inequities and violations. Lack of awareness of the right by the general population and health workers was cited by 52% of the respondents. A lot remains to be done towards the realisation of the right to health in the African Region. Member States are encouraged to review their legislation and policies to assess their consistency with human rights standards, and put in place institutional mechanisms and adequate resources that will ensure their implementation, enforcement and monitoring.