Spreading Awareness of Abuse in Utah With Hope, Not Fear.

More often than not we hear the daunting statistics about domestic abuse, but not enough about the hopeful stories. 

Last October, many college students in Utah gathered together to spread that much-needed hope in their communities as a part of Domestic Violence Awareness Month with several events.

For example, Brigham Young University hosted a clothing drive for the Turning Point, a local women's and children's shelter. They also had a special candlelight vigil in honor of those who lost their lives to domestic abuse, with inspirational music by Colby Stead.

Another impactful event is the annual Clothesline Project at Utah Valley University. The project reminds us that abuse exists in our community with stories of anonymous victims written on color-coded shirts. Survivors share their voices and guests listen. This breaks the silences and encourages us to become a part of making our world a safer place.

Many of these events raised awareness about this serious issue, but most of all brought the discussion to the table.

In fact, many people don't think domestic violence exists in their hometown--but that's a misconception.

To create dialogue for such a taboo subject, some universities such as Weber State held lectures about abuse. Their Women's Services Center educated guests on "Where Does Domestic Violence Begin."

I'd like to pose the question, where does it end?

What has your community or university done to end domestic abuse? Comment and share your experience with Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

If you haven't joined the movement for peace, find the domestic violence coalition in your state and get involved.

The Lisbon Treaty and the Council of Europe

by Martyn Bond

The Council of Europe voted unanimously in favour of Kerstin Lundgren's report on the impact of the Lisbon Treaty, but behind the scenes the picture is fractured

In early October, the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe voted unanimously in favour of Kerstin Lundgren's report on the impact of the Lisbon Treaty, but behind the scenes the picture is more fractured and contentious. Lisbon gives the European Union "legal personality" and invites it to subscribe to the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the key legal function of the CoE. Negotiations between the EU and the CoE had almost been concluded and observers expected a signature possibly before the end of the year, soon after the UK takes over the presidency of the CoE - in November.

But out of the blue, the UK delegation tabled a "non-paper" raising a number of larger questions. Delegations now consider these will require much more work, possibly postponing the signing ceremony well beyond the end of the UK presidency next May. All this plays out against the background of serious debate inside the ruling coalition in London. The prime minister and the home secretary have declared that they are personally in favour of the UK denouncing the ECHR, while the deputy prime minister, the Conservative justice minister and the lone Liberal-Democrat junior minister at the Home Office insist the UK will not leave the convention. Continental governments are not used to the UK failing to come to a coherent and unified position, and are duly shocked. Welcome to coalition government.

Lundgren's report starts from the assumption that, after mature reflection, no member state would be against the EU subscribing to the ECHR. After all, they agreed the Lisbon Treaty, so why hesitate now? The union joining would extend the ECHR to cover acts of the bloc and of the member states when acting for the EU, filling a judicial black hole and extending the protection of human rights across the whole range of supranational policies. Her report goes on to invite the European Commission, on behalf of the EU, to sign up to 10 more core CoE conventions: against torture, against trafficking in human beings, protecting children against sexual exploitation and abuse, combating domestic violence, protecting personal data, preventing terrorism, strengthening the criminal and the civil law on corruption and preventing cybercrime as well as promoting social rights by signing the revised European Social Charter. Of these conventions, only one – the Convention for the Prevention of Torture – has been signed and ratified by all 47 member states of the CoE.

In several cases, the commission signing these conventions might well pressure some member states, who have not done so yet, to sign at the same time. The impact of a consistent bloc of member states enforcing respect for the values protected by these conventions would be considerable. It would impact immediately on the other members of the CoE – the 20 states not in the EU which include big payers such as Turkey, Ukraine and Russia. It would drive up standards across the whole region. It would also allow the EU to offer practical and financial support for capacity-building programmes in those states and to expand that offer to the wider European neighbourhood, including the southern littoral of the Mediterranean. It would create a homogenous area of protected human rights across Europe's "near abroad".

These capacity-building measures are the counterpart of monitoring mechanisms, which already ensure that all members of the CoE are informed regularly about the application of convention standards across the continent. Council missions visit and check on the practical application of standards in other member states, often making reports public and always applying pressure to bring practice up to convention norms. For all its integrative potential, the EU's influence is currently weakened because in none of the conventions recommended in the Lundgren report do member states act as one, since not all countries have yet ratified the conventions in question.

There are a number of procedural and administrative questions that the negotiations to date have largely settled. What is the relation between the authority of the European Court of Justice, in Luxembourg, and the European Court of Human Rights, in Strasbourg? How to select an EU judge to sit on the Court of Human Rights? Will this mean enhanced relations between the parliamentary assembly of the CoE and the European Parliament? The legal experts, the parliamentarians and even the non-governmental organisations consulted as "civil society" all agree. Only the UK thinks that what appeared to have been agreed needs to be reviewed again.
Although, one more fundamental issue that the negotiations have not really tackled was endorsed by the Lundgren report with cautious optimism: the perspective of the EU going much further than signing the ECHR and a number of conventions by acceding to the CoE as a full member.

That opens the perspective of a united approach to CoE matters by member states, offering a dominant view within the CoE where they make up a majority of members. The report invites the committee of ministers - the CoE's decision-making body - and the parliamentary assembly to consider this issue further. The report was approved with 58 votes in favour, with none against and only one abstention - by a Russian MP from the Group of European Democrats. The committee of ministers will need to find very good reasons to postpone this discussion, and that could add to the difficulties for the UK presidency.

Martyn Bond is visiting professor of European politics at Royal Holloway University, in the UK, and deputy chairman of the London Press Club

The Whistleblower: Amplifying the Reality of Human Trafficking

Sexual trafficking. It's hard for people to wrap their minds around the scope of the problem. A new film, The Whistleblower, presents an on the ground retelling of the story of Kathryn Bolkovac (Rachel Weisz), a Nebraskan police officer who became part of the United Nations police team in post-war Bosnia. Hired by Democra, a government contractor that recruited candidates, she uncovered a trafficking operation that reached to the highest echelons of power.

The movie is structured in a style reminiscent of the 1980s Costa-Gavrasnarratives. The dramatization is based on actual events. Some characters have been merged, with names and timelines changed for the sake of a streamlined plot. One of the anchoring characters is Madeleine Rees (Vanessa Redgrave), who was the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Bosnia.

Shot in palettes of blues and browns, the facts are laid out as Bolkovac -- who is of Croatian descent -- takes her belief in "doing her job" into the field. After ten years of experience on the domestic violence beat back home, Bolkovac finds herself up against a web of corrupt players ranging from local police and United Nations peacekeepers, to State Department brass and Democra bigwigs.

Bolkovac discovers that the area's bars and clubs are serving as a front to sites where girls from the Ukraine, Russia, and Eastern Europe have been enslaved. Many of the girls being sold to an international clientele are between 12 and 15 years old.

The story's trajectory follows Bolkovac (who served as a story consultant) from her discovery of trafficking corruption, complicity, and cover-ups through her efforts to report her findings--despite files of evidence disappearing and witness tampering. Death threats are the precursor to her being fired, when she gets too close to the truth. The multilayered cover-up finally sees the light of day when she files a wrongful dismissal case against Democra, and feeds the information from her findings to the British press.

Director Larysa Kondracki spent time with her co-writer in Eastern Europe doing background research. There are two key scenes that speak volumes. One is revelatory, the other is searing. In the former, Bolkovac--and the audience--begin to understand the magnitude of what she is up against as she scrutinizes the first photos and bits of information she had pinned to her office wall. The camera pulls back to show how the original findings have grown exponentially. The latter is an indelible image of one of the girls being raped, tortured and killed in front of the others, as an example of why compliance is the only way to survive.

The Human Rights Watch Film Festival showcased the New York premiere of The Whistleblower in June. HRW has done extensive work documenting post-war abuse in the Balkans. Their website article "Bosnia and Herzegovina: Traffickers Walk Free" gives an overview of the material covered in the movie. In addition, they issued a report in 2002 that breaks down their findings into twelve comprehensive sections.

I interviewed Kondracki by e-mail to get additional insights about her vision and aspirations for the movie. She explained that as a Ukrainian Canadian, the issue of sex trafficking was widely discussed within her community. When she read Bolkovac's book, The Whistleblower: Sex Trafficking, Military Contractors, and One Woman's Fight for Justice, she was overwhelmed by the breadth of the crime of trafficking. She was surprised that a film had not already been made.

What made you decide to do the movie as an indie film? Did you think it would give you more latitude to portray the story as you best saw fit?

To be honest, I didn't see another way. We set out to do it. We spent some time in studios, which was a valuable experience and I think the script was improved when we were there. But ultimately, this was the way that made sense. That's where I have to hand it to the producers. Once we got the project out, we were shooting within nine months.

Do you see the film reaching people about the issue of human trafficking in a way that a news story or article cannot? Are you hoping that the "political thriller" tag will pull people in, which might otherwise be afraid of the subject matter?

Absolutely. Kathy's story is practically a Robert Ludlum novel. Sex, scandal, corruption, governments, international cover-ups. It's something you would usually make up. Our primary goal was to make a good thriller with a great character at the center. Is she going to get the girl? Are they going to get our heroine?

Was it Bolkovac's experience with domestic violence in the United States, combined with how she got a conviction on her first time at bat in Bosnia, that made Madeleine Rees reach out to her?

Yes. That conviction made Kathy really stand out.

How did you decide how far to go with graphically showing the abuse and torture of the trafficked girls?

I wasn't going to make this movie and not be realistic. But I also had no intention of deterring audiences. We tested it several times, and found the right balance. You don't see anything. It's not unlike Silence of the Lambs in a way. It's what's inferred.

How is the United Nations dealing with the film? I understand there was an internal memo that was circulated that advocated a "no comment" policy. Does that suggest that they haven't learned anything from their experience about transparency?
The internal memo left it at the UN being split. But we have learned from sources that they are sticking with a "damage control" policy. I really have no idea what they've learned, and why they aren't seizing the opportunity not only to right these wrongs, but in doing so, to gain some faith from so many cynics that are watching. Show us you want to be the organization you're meant to be. I've written a letter to Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon, and we have offered to screen the film wherever and whenever they want. So far...No Comment.

cultureID specifically deals with connecting those doing cultural work with political and social intent/content with audiences. How do you see The Whistleblower within this context?
I genuinely believe that films have one of the loudest voices. And I believe that if we can get this story into public discourse, the State Department and the United Nations will be embarrassed. Hopefully, enough to do something. Look at Guantanamo, extraordinary renditions...I'm not saying that's done with, but at least they aren't snatching people in plain sight out of airports anymore. Same thing here. U.S. tax dollars should not be going to the buying and selling of girls. Period. There's no grey area to that.

This article originally appeared on the site cultureID..

 

Follow Marcia G. Yerman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mgyerman

American in Bosnia Discovers the Horrors of Human Trafficking

By STEPHEN HOLDENMore About This Movie Published: August 4, 2011

In the lineage of real-life David-and-Goliath movies in which intrepid seekers of the truth investigate malfeasance in high places, “The Whistleblower” deserves an honorable mention. This earnest film may not be as dramatically coherent or as gripping as “Serpico,” “All the President’s Men,” “Erin Brockovich” and “Silkwood,” to name four much-decorated Hollywood prototypes. But its revelations are, if anything, more devastating and far more immediate than the dirty deeds uncovered in those predecessors.

• Overview
• Tickets & Showtimes
• Cast, Credits & Awards
• Readers' Reviews
• Trailers & Clips
  View Clip...

Enlarge This Image

Cary Fukunaga/Samuel Goldwyn Films

Vanessa Redgrave, who has a cameo role in the film.

The directorial debut of the Canadian filmmaker Larysa Kondracki, this grueling exposé of human trafficking in postwar Bosnia teeters in an uneasy balance between quasi-documentary and fiction. Its most sickening moment shows the rape and torture of a rebellious young prostitute smuggled from Ukraine into a Bosnian backwoods brothel while other young “whores of war,” as one character dismisses human trafficking victims, are forced to watch.

But for all its high-mindedness, “The Whistleblower,” filmed largely in Romania, has a choppy, fumbling screenplay (by Ms. Kondracki and Eilis Kirwan) that lurches between shrill editorializing and vagueness while sorting through more characters than it can comfortably handle or even readily identify.

As Kathryn Bolkovac (Rachel Weisz), the movie’s slingshot-toting American heroine, marches into a political minefield, she seems strangely immune to danger until near the end of the film. “The Whistleblower” ultimately fizzles by withholding any cathartic sense that justice was done, or ever will be done, once Kathryn spills the beans to the British news media.

When the story begins, she is a police officer and a divorced mother living in Lincoln, Neb. Prevented from transferring to Atlanta to be nearer to her daughter, she impulsively accepts a lucrative job as a United Nations peacekeeping officer in Bosnia in 1999. The blunt, fearless Kathryn embraces her new job with a gusto that immediately raises eyebrows among her cynical co-workers, who look down at the Eastern Europeans they have been charged to help.

Ms. Weisz’s feisty performance is the strongest element of “The Whistleblower.” She imbues Kathryn with the same stubborn-verging-on-fanatical zeal that Rose Byrne (whom Ms. Weisz physically resembles) brings to her character, Ellen Parsons, in the television series “Damages,” with which “The Whistleblower” shares a strain of paranoia.

After demonstrating her mettle in prosecuting a case of domestic violence, Kathryn is offered a job in the United Nations Gender Affairs Office, working with the police to investigate rape, domestic abuse and sex trafficking. Her gumption earns her the admiration of Madeleine Rees (Vanessa Redgrave, in a cameo), the head of the United Nations Human Rights Commission, who remains an enigmatic, undeveloped character. The party-loving Kathryn also begins a casual affair with Jan (Nikolaj Lie Kaas), a fellow peacekeeping officer.

Kathryn comes face to face with the truth when she journeys to a bar in the countryside, where she discovers a nest of imprisoned young prostitutes who are so frightened that they refuse to talk to her. When she reports back to her smirking boss, Fred Murray (David Hewlett), and he mockingly asks her if she’s “going Columbo,” she realizes that he is part of a conspiracy of silence among her male co-workers. Even Laura Leviani (Monica Bellucci), the chilly head of the repatriation program, is of no help: she insists that bureaucratic rules leave her unable to rescue prostitutes whose passports have been confiscated by their kidnappers.

As Kathryn gathers evidence, including Abu Ghraib-like snapshots of the girls and their johns, a fuller picture begins to emerge of a lucrative, far-reaching operation involving the police and United Nations peacekeepers, many of them protected by diplomatic immunity. The more noise she makes to United Nations higher-ups, the more apparent it becomes that she is viewed as a troublemaking nuisance, and her job is terminated.

The movie concentrates on Kathryn’s efforts to coax two terrified Ukrainian girls, Raya (Roxana Condurache) and her best friend, Irka (Rayisa Kondracki, the director’s sister), to identify their kidnappers. Kathryn recklessly promises Raya protection if she agrees to talk, with dire consequences. Near the end of “The Whistleblower,” a scene is awkwardly inserted in which Raya’s mother discovers that immediate family members sold her daughter into slavery.

Kathryn is so outraged by her discoveries that she has no room for panic. Her lack of caution suggests that only someone blindly immune to intimidation would rattle so many cages without fearing for her life. Some of the horrors in the book Ms. Bolkovac wrote about her experiences, including the fact that many of the trafficked girls were much younger than those shown in the movie, are softened.

Kathryn’s only ally is Peter Ward (David Strathairn, in ominously brooding, conspiratorial mode), an internal affairs specialist who, in the film’s most suspenseful scene, helps her smuggle evidence out of her office.

“The Whistleblower” tells a story so repellent that it is almost beyond belief. Its conclusion — that in the moral quagmire of war and its aftermath, human trafficking and corruption are collateral damage — is unutterably depressing.

“The Whistleblower” is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian). It has a graphic rape, brutalization and strong language.

Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this review misstated the title of the film at one point. “The Whistleblower: Sex Trafficking, Military Contractors, and One Woman’s Fight for Justice” is the title of Kathryn Bolkovac’s book about her experiences. The review also referred incorrectly to the film. While the director is Canadian, the movie is a Canadian-German co-production, not a Canadian film.

US, Russia agree on rules for safer adoptions

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov shakes hands with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, at the State Department in Washington, Wednesday, July 13, 2011.AP

July 14, 2011 at 06:41 | Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States and Russia ended an ugly dispute over the abuse of adopted Russian children on Wednesday, with Washington signing an agreement that will increase oversight of adopting families to curtail possible maltreatment.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov signed the accord in a ceremony in Washington.

Russia has been complaining for several years about cases where adopted Russian children had been abused in the U.S. The "last straw" — as Lavrov had put it — came in April 2010 when an adoptive mother from Tennessee sent her 7-year-old boy unaccompanied on a plane back to Moscow because she did not want to raise him anymore.

Russia threatened to suspend adoptions to the U.S., though it did not in fact do so, and insisted that U.S. officials negotiate a bilateral deal enabling Russian authorities to track the welfare of Russian adoptees more closely.

"We take very seriously the safety and security of children that are adopted by American parents," Clinton told reporters. "This agreement provides new, important safeguards to protect them. It also increases transparency for all parties involved in the adoption process."

The deal stipulates that adoption agencies can operate in Russia only with the authorization of the country's government, except in cases where a child is being adopted by relatives.

Better information will also be provided to prospective parents about the social and medical histories of children.

Once an adoption has been completed, the U.S. agency that made the arrangements will be required to monitor the living conditions and upbringing of the child, scheduling periodic visits by a social worker and sending reports to Russian authorities about the child's development.

In cases where the adoptive parents seek to dissolve an adoption, the agency will be required to notify Russian authorities and the State Department as soon as feasible.

Russia demanded the agreement after the uproar sparked when Artyom Savelyev was sent back from his adoptive home in Tennessee in April 2010.

Savelyev's adoptive mother refused to allow a social worker into the house less than a month before the boy was returned with a note saying she no longer wanted to be his mother because the child had psychological problems.

The incident outraged Russia, for years one of the biggest sources of adopted children for Americans. Over the past six years, adoptions from Russia by U.S. families have fallen steadily — there were 1,092 last year, compared to more than 5,800 in 2004.

Some international adoption proceedings in Russia were slowed in response to the Tennessee incident, though there was no complete halt.

Adoption advocates in the U.S. worried that the U.S.-Russian friction might cause potential adoptive parents to look toward other countries and leave more Russian children at the mercy of underfunded, overcrowded orphanages.

There are roughly 250,000 children in those orphanages. Many of the children who leave them end up in jail, become drug abusers or turn to prostitution or other crime.

"We want all children, whether they be Russian children or American children, to be able to have loving homes with families that will take good care of them," Clinton said.

Lavrov said the agreement would help counter growing public anger over the fate of Russian children in the United States.

Speaking through an interpreter, he thanked the U.S. for its work toward finding a solution.

Russian officials have claimed that at least 17 adopted Russian children have died in domestic violence in American families.

Earlier this month, local media reported that a central Pennsylvania couple accused of killing their adopted Russian son won't face the death penalty if convicted.

Police say the child had a traumatic brain injury, about 80 external injuries and was malnourished when he died in 2009, but the parents say the boy repeatedly hurt himself and that they provided him with sufficient medical care.

Chuck Johnson, chief executive of the National Council for Adoption, said many of the cases of abuse involved Russian children who were adopted independently, rather than through U.S. adoption agencies accredited by Russian authorities.

Under the treaty, such independent adoptions will be prohibited, and Johnson said he hoped one result would be a gradual increase in adoptions from Russia as officials in Moscow regain trust of the U.S. adoption system.

"For the Russians, their big get is that they will now be able to maintain some type of contact with the child," Johnson said. "That's not been possible in the past... They had no mechanism to deal with cases where there are problems."

State Department officials, in a briefing after the signing, stressed that Russian officials would still have no direct authority over U.S. families or the adopted children, but would have new powers to set conditions for U.S. agencies in how they handle their follow-up monitoring of adoptions from Russia.

The treaty is not retroactive. Parents and agencies with adoption applications pending in Russia will be able to complete them under prior procedures.

Read more: http://www.kyivpost.com/news/russia/detail/108584/#ixzz1S73S9e7C

UN: Police, courts and judiciary fail women

More than half the world's working women are trapped in insecure jobs, often without protection from labor laws.Today at 08:09 | Associated PressUNITED NATIONS (AP) — More than half the world's working women are trapped in insecure jobs, often without protection from labor laws. Some 600 million women live in countries where domestic violence is not a crime. And just 28 countries have parliaments where at least 30 percent of the lawmakers are women.

These are some of the key findings in the first report issued by the new U.N. agency, UN Women, entitled "Progress of the World's Women: In Pursuit of Justice," which was released Wednesday.

While 139 countries and territories now guarantee gender equality in their constitutions, the report said millions of women in many countries are still deprived of economic resources and access to public services and all too often "are denied control over their bodies, denied a voice in decision-making and denied protection from violence."

"For most of the world's women the laws that exist on paper do not always translate into equality and justice," it said. "In many contexts, in rich and poor countries alike, the infrastructure of justice — the police, the courts and the judiciary — is failing women, which mainfests itself in poor services and hostile attitudes from the very people whose duty it is to fulfill women's rights."

In the 169-page report, UN Women called on governments to repeal laws that discriminate against women, provide more funding to support innovative services such as legal aid and specialized courts to ensure that women can access the justice system and make certain that there are female police, judges and legislators.

While women have achieved greater economic empowerment through laws that prohibit discriminatory practices, guarantee equal pay and provide for maternity and paternity leave, the report said 53 percent of working women — 600 million in total — are in vulnerable jobs such as self-employment, domestic work, or unpaid work for family businesses which often lack the protection of labor laws.

It said women are still paid up to 30 percent less than men in some of the 117 countries that have laws guaranteeing equal pay in the workplace.

UN Women stressed that laws must be enforced if women are to achieve equality, but pointed to many barriers.

"In the developing world, more than one third of women are married before the age of 18, missing out on education and exposed to the risks of early pregnancy," the report said.

Domestic violence is now outlawed in 125 countries but 603 million women live in countries where it is not a crime — and even where there are laws, the report said, "millions of women report experiencing violence in their lifetimes, usually at the hands of an intimate partner."

UN Women urged governments to learn from countries that have taken practical steps to make justice accessible to ordinary women.

It cited South Africa's "one-stop shops" that bring justice, legal and health care services together, women's police stations in Latin America that have led to an increase in the reporting of gender-based violence, Congo's mobile courts which are bringing justice to women in rural areas where sexual violence is high, and legal aid to women in countries from Pakistan and Mexico to Fiji and Kyrgyzstan.

The report also noted that in countries with steep increases in women's representation in parliaments — such as Rwanda, Nepal and Spain — progressive laws on women's rights have often followed.

Read more: http://www.kyivpost.com/news/world/detail/108085/#ixzz1RLQMpBHq

The worst places in the world to be a woman - CBSNews

Afghan women head off to an engagement party leaving a curtained local beauty parlor October 17, 2010, in Kabul, Afghanistan. 

(Credit: Paula Bronstein /Getty Images)

For the fairer sex, most places in the world present a special set of burdens that menfolk cannot imagine, even if they created them.

A new survey highlights the places around the world where it is especially bad to be a woman, produced by the recently launched TrustLaw website, a product of the Thomson Reuters Foundation that is aimed at being "a global centre for free legal assistance and a hub of news and information on anti-corruption issues, good governance and women's legal rights."

The survey was conducted among gender experts on five continents, and they rated each country's overall danger to women, as well as health threats, sexual violence, non-sexual violence, cultural or religious factors, lack of access to resources and trafficking.

Afghanistan tops the list, as it is in general one of the world's most dangerous places. Congo, Pakistan, India and Somalia rounded out the top five.

While Afghanistan was cited for its overall level of violence, there are a host of other factors that caused TrustLaw to put it atop the list. One in 11 women there have a chance of dying in childbirth; Some 87 percent of women are illiterate; and as many as 80 percent of girls face forced marriages.

Congo was put atop the list because of the staggering level of sexual violence in the country - a product of many years of war and humanitarian disasters. As many as 400,000 women are raped there annually.

As many as 1,000 women are killed annually in Pakistan in so-called "honor killings." Additionally, families defending their "honor" there are also known to attack women with acid to disfigure them, stone them to death, or simply beat them. The widespread practice of arranged and forced marriages also present a hurdle to personal freedom for women there.

India, while a rapidly developing country, still places great cultural burdens on women. In addition to incredibly high rates of human trafficking and prostitution involving women, especially girls, foeticide (the killing of fetuses) and infanticide with females is incredibly high there. As many as 50 million females are reported to have gone missing because of the practice in the last century.

Finally, Somalia, another generally very dangerous place, rounded out the top five. Somali women's minister Maryan Qasim told TrustLaw: "The most dangerous thing a woman in Somalia can do is to become pregnant. When a woman becomes pregnant her life is 50-50 because there is no antenatal care at all. There are no hospitals, no healthcare, no nothing. Add to that the rape cases that happen on a daily basis, the female genital mutilation that is being done to every single girl in Somalia. Add to that the famine and the drought. Add to that the fighting (which means) you can die any minute, any day."

The survey's authors suggest that a lack of access to economic, health and educational resources posed just as great a threat to women around the world as anything else.

Elisabeth Roesch, who works on gender-based violence for the International Rescue Committee, told TrustLaw: "When you actually allow women and girls to express themselves, these are the problems they cite: 'We can't go to school. We can't make enough money to support our families. We can't access the local health clinic, either because our husband won't allow us or it's inaccessible.' These are real problems."

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20071178-503543.html#ixzz1PMB4NbBJ

“Human rights start with children’s rights”

The head of the UNICEF mission in Ukraine speaks about the priorities of the state, the Soviet heritage and destroying stereotypes

By Oksana MYKOLIUK, The Day

YUKIE MOKUO

Unfortunately, there are particularly entrenched problems linked to children’s rights protection and child abuse in Ukraine. The state has to change the whole system, bring down stereotypes and cultivate humanity in people so that the younger generation doesn’t suffer. Ukraine has only made its first steps toward eradicating child abuse, a problem that was hushed up for years. On May 24-25 an international conference focusing on children’s rights violations was held in Kyiv. It was organized by UNICEF and the Council of Europe, together with the assistance of the Ukrainian government, and attended by nearly 200 foreign experts. Its title was “Child Abuse Counteraction: From Separate Actions to Complex Strategies.” The Day before its opening The Day interviewed the head of the UNICEF mission in Ukraine Yukie MOKUO.

Judging from the name of the conference, it will be focused on creating new approaches in governmental strategies, aimed at tracking cases of child abuse and preventing them?

“The conference will address questions related to child abuse counteraction. When we talk about child abuse we have to know that it concerns not only physical punishment. Of course, physical abuse also matters, but there are also issues connected to the child’s social and emotional development. Especially for children brought up in orphanages and unable to grow in a family environment. It’s a burning issue in terms of social protection, not only in Ukraine but in other countries, too. It’s all about services provided to children and caring for them. We believe that the more children stay in orphanages, the more they are abused. We shouldn’t, however, forget about the existence of child abuse at home, both physical and psychological. Our society is also contaminated with such forms of child abuse as sexual exploitation, trafficking of children and child prostitution. So, when talking about the conference we say that we try to embrace the issues related to child protection with a complex approach. This event is of extreme importance for the Ukrainian government since Ukraine will preside over the Committee of Ministers in the Council of Europe from May to November this year. It’s the first conference held within the framework of the Ukrainian presidency in the Council of Europe.

“UNICEF is glad that the Ukrainian government has prioritized the question of children’s rights protection. The conference will be attended by nearly 200 experts from 23 countries of Western and Eastern Europe. They account for half of the attendance; the other half is made up of government representatives. We’ll have the UN mission (the representative of the Secretary General for Violence Against Children) and the CoE mission (the Deputy Secretary General).

“The UNICEF regional director, supervising the 23 countries of this region, will be also present. I’d like to emphasize that Ukraine promised to make children’s rights protection a priority during its CoE presidency. We want to draw attention to these questions and we want the Ukrainian government to be ready to ratify international conventions. There’s the European Convention No. 201 protecting children from sexual exploitation. There’s also the Hague Convention on international adoption, which was not ratified by Ukraine. Both of them are being worked on by the corresponding parliamentary committees and I hope that the government will ratify them. Then we will be able to say that the Ukrainian government is ready to make certain steps.”

Photo by Ruslan KANIUKA, The Day   YUKIE MOKUO

Why do you think is it that we can’t eradicate domestic and social abuse for so many years and how does the situation in Ukraine compared to Europe?

“Unfortunately, child abuse exists all over the world. We might have an impression that abuse escalates as the media talk about it more and more. However, we understand that the situation is quite the opposite. Traditionally, family abuse has been hidden. UNICEF concentrates on social awareness improvement not only in the family but also among teachers, doctors and social workers. The more they know about the problem the better this problem will be dealt with. It’s essential that society has its eyes open to identify cases of abuse and inform the corresponding services about them. The role of teachers, doctors, nurses and social workers that come into contact with children is crucial as they are able to see a child’s problems and understand that a child is abused. In my opinion, Ukraine has made progress in this sphere. We have improved the report system and raised awareness. However, it’s not enough and I think that governmental institutions and society have to make efforts to resolve this complex of problems. The problem of child abuse is insufficiently covered in Ukrainian society compared to other European countries. Thus, Ukraine needs better mechanisms of reporting cases of child abuse.”

What kind of mechanisms?

“The awareness of people working in governmental institutions, not only in the social sector, but in law enforcement agencies as well. As for the legislative basis, there are certain problems there. At present we’re working on several amendments in the cooperation with the Verkhovna Rada. The sexual exploitation of children and child prostitution are examples of this. We’re talking about the children aged 16 to 18 that are at risk of child prostitution. Currently, they have to pay a fine but their clients are not answerable. The UN Convention includes an optional article on abuse, prostitution and sexual exploitation. It provides that any adult engaging in a sexual act with a minor is fully answerable for this. This norm doesn’t exist in Ukraine. It’s only an example. The law itself doesn’t work. We have to enforce the role of social assistance. For example, if a child is in an environment where they have to provide sexual services, we have to find a reason for this in their education and family. This way we have to protect children not only through legislation but also through social assistance that will prevent them from doing such things. Here we address the question of the social security of Ukrainian families since a lot of them live in poverty, suffer form unemployment, and have members addicted to drugs and alcohol. Of course, these problems affect their children.”

Child abuse is common in Ukraine’s orphanages. Are you going to cover this issue at the conference and what’s the UNICEF’s position?

“As for this system, we strongly protect children’s rights to grow in families. The problem of children raised outside of families is topical for many countries of the region. We can see that there are a lot of cases of child abuse in such institutions but we don’t have exact numbers. We don’t have exact statistics about how many children have been abused, in this way or another. Examples abound but we don’t have the exact statistics. Once I was invited to Shuster’s talk-show to discuss the topic of children living in orphanages. There were people there who grew up in such institutions but were successful in life. So those people could have said something good about orphanages. I was shocked that those people spoke about the abuse they experienced. Even successful people pay attention to the abuse they suffered from in orphanages. So, we are aware of such cases, but we don’t have any statistics. It can be easily explained. Let’s look at foster families. How do they build relations between parents and children? They have to care about their children, love and protect them, but they also have to provide an environment where children will grow and develop social skills. An important role is attributed to social services, that have to help. If we look at orphanages where children differ from our children a lot, they lose lots of opportunities for their development: not only in terms of social skills, but also in what regards cognitive and emotional ones. We need a powerful independent monitoring mechanism to be able to understand the level of abuse and violence in orphanages. The former powerful Soviet social security system proved to be tenuous from the point of self-repayment, profitability and efficiency in the new Ukrainian reality. The social security system has to be reformed to be able to address modern challenges. The institutions where children are [currently] kept are the heritage of the Soviet system, which has to be reformed.”

Will the questions related to children’s rights protection be resolved faster after the position of a children’s ombudsman is introduced in Ukraine?

“We rightly praise Nina Karpachova, who deals with questions related to human rights protection efficiently. Of course, in her office there are people dealing with questions of children’s rights protection, too. We see the possibilities and potential to bolster the Ukrainian ombudsman’s position to be able to better react to children’s rights violations and to protect [the children]. It’s not about just dealing with individual questions. I believe that the Ukrainian ombudsman can more actively participate in resolving problems with us, so as to be able to solve the systemic questions concerning child abuse, to reform the orphanage system and to replace it with alternative forms of family education. We think that we’re able to activate cooperation with the Ukrainian ombudsman. Ideally, UNICEF is supporting the idea to delegate the children’s rights protection issues to a children’s ombudsman. However, it’s closely related to the context of the country. Ukraine has to make its own decisions. The issue is to introduce a powerful mechanism of children’s rights protection monitoring in the South of Ukraine.”

What do you think about the transformation of the Ministry of Youth, Family and Sports into a Department at the Ministry of Education and Science?

“I’ve already expressed my opinion on behalf of UNICEF to the Ukrainian president and government. I also spoke about it during a session of the Verkhovna Rada last December. Certainly, UNICEF respects the decision of the Ukrainian government as it represents a sovereign state. UNICEF fully accepts this decision, aimed at transferring the functions of that ministry to the Ministry of Education. However, we strongly recommend that during this reform the main functions concerning children’s rights protection be preserved. We know about the presidential decree issued a month ago, ordering to transfer to the Ministry of Social Policy the functions related to the protection of children, women and families. The government is still working on determining these functions’ structure. Our organization will gladly cooperate with the Ukrainian government to perform those functions during the process of reform. We have the Department for Adoption and Protection of Children and the Department for Family and Gender Policy. Merging those two departments with the Ministry of Social Policy might be a good idea since one institution will perform all the functions. It might be an advantage.

“The next question is of a great importance. If a family experiences a difficult situation, it’s unemployed, poor or a mother raises three children on her own, such a family needs to have social protection (consultancies, legal assistance, etc.), and financial support as well. Such families in crisis should receive the whole ‘assistance package.’ If such families aren’t sufficiently protected they risk becoming asocial, which can lead to child abuse.”

Don’t you think that in half a year, when Ukraine’s presidency in the EC finishes, the Ukrainian government will lose interest in children’s rights?

“I hope that the Ukrainian government will assume specific obligations in front of the international community as you have the best opportunity to demonstrate the changes in the sphere of human and children’s rights protection. I’ve been working here for two years now and I see that you have good resources and an educated society. I don’t think that the Ukrainian government will do a foolish thing and miss this opportunity. It’s a real chance for Ukraine to show its strong points. However, work has to be done not only at a governmental level. It has to develop into specific government obligations to pursue this or that policy. This will cause certain budget expenditures directed at the protection of children. UNICEF is ready to provide its technical help any time. I hope that we’ll cooperate in future as well.”

http://www.day.kiev.ua/210321