LE PRATICHE TRADIZIONALI LESIVE IN EUROPA E IN SUDAFRICA. L'ART. 5 CEDAW E GLI OSTACOLI NELLA PROMOZIONE DELL'UGUAGLIANZA DI GENERE

Harmful traditional Practices in Europe and South Africa -
Art. 5 a CEDAW and Obstacles in Implementing Gender Equality

by Dr. Lilian Hofmeister

Relazione della giudice Lilian Hofmeister al convegno tenutosi a Ravenna il 15 gennaio 2010, organizzato dall'Assessorato alle Pari Opportunità del Comune di Ravenna, dai Giuristi Democratici e da D.i.RE - Donne in rete contro la violenza

I Personal approach
II Austrian Embassy Project - Pretoria 2009
III The situation in Europe and South Africa
IV Art 5 a CEDAW
V What is to be done ?


I

Personal approach
May I introduce myself.
I am from Austria and I have been working as a judge specialised in commercial law since 1976. However, since the 1980ies I have also focussed on the implementation of human rights at the international and national level. In 1993 I was a delegate at the UN World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna . I was also member of the Austrian government delegation at the 4 th UN World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995. In 1998 I was appointed Substitute Justice at the Austrian Constitutional Court.


II
Austrian Embassy Project - Pretoria 2009
In 2007 the Austrian Parliament celebrated the 25 th anniversary of ratification of CEDAW with an enquete to highlighten the achievments of South Africa concerning women´s rights as human rights. After that event Mr. Essop PAHAD, Minister in the South African Presidency, and Ms Barbara PRAMMER, Speaker of the Austrian National Assembly , initiated a project: Legal experts should be brought together
to study and compair social ans cultural patterns. They should identify structural obstacles which possibly hinder the full enjoyment of women´s rights in both countries. They should assess the real and legal conditions with a view to achieving
the elimination of prejudices and stereotyping.Together they should draft a document concerning Art 5 a CEDAW as an input to the CEDAW Committee. During the 53 rd session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women in March 2009 the femal ministers for women´s affairs of both countries confirmed their interest towards this joint venture.

In March and November 2009 I visited South Africa. I met Ms. Dr. Manto TSHABALALA-MSIMANG and many representatives of the state and of the civil society. Our discussions were very fruitful: We gathered informations.We improved our knowlegde about prejudices and stereotyping concerning the gender-aspect.We discussed traditions in the context of the modern South African Constitution . We spoke about CEDAW and the influence of patriarchy . I also met my good friend Justice Edwin CAMERON, judge at the South African Constitutional Court and famous activist against HIV and aids.

In April 2009 we wrote a draft for a joint report under the heading „ Approaching Harmful Traditional Practices Affecting Women and Girl Child „.Our recommendations said:

„ ........In time for next years´s CSW ( = 54 th meeting of the Commission on the Status of Women in New York in March 2010 ) a mixed expert group representing traditional leaders, women´s rights activists, historians, physicians, lawyers and artists should discuss aspects of culture as a socio-economic necessity, particularly in rural areas ,and should elaborate on the significance of harmful practices in their cultural context . Practices should also be analyzed according their origins , and their historic as well as their contemporary relevance..........

...........Agents of schange should be identified. Possible effects of the eradication of harmful practices should be evaluated,and possible compensating measures identified. Lessons learned from protecting women´s rights in migrant communities should be collected.

The CEDAW Committee should be alerted to the activities with the view to engaging the Committee in drafting a General Recommendation on CEDAW Art 5, addressing harmful practices beyond FGM....“

The goal is to promote transfomation of the legal systems in all member states under Art 5 and to change legal and illegal practices in the global society.


III
The situation in Europe and South Africa
In Austria I identified a harmful practice of absolute lack concerning the trans- parency of wages between men and women. Although Austria is a member state of the EU, there still exists a wide gap between male and female wages.
During women´s active working period the difference amounts approximately 20 % - 40%, after retirement sometimes nearly 60 % ! Employers often treat female workers in a contemptuous way: On principle they offer them lower wages and seem to be sure that women will do their best like „ hard working bees „. 15 years old beginners are affected as well as senior workers. The elder often live in poverty and so do young women with children. Structural violence against women is a hidden but everyday problem. Domestic violence is a very important issue that cannot be ignored any longer.

But look at Europe:

Honor crimes happen also in Western Europe. Please remember Hatun Sürücü, a German citizen, who was killed by their brother, because she had tried to live „ like a German woman“.

Roma suffer from violence in Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Bulgaria.

Trafficking in women ( and children )from Africa and Eastern Europe to our countries is a usual harmful practice.

FGM f.i. In France, virginity testing in Turkey, enforced marriages everywhere.

Wearing the Burka-veil or similar head scarfs in the public etc. etc.

In South Africa witchcraft and magic is also a problem, especially in rural areas. In my opinion the root causes for severe human rights violations are often a distorted view of reality. And it is a sad fact that the actual physical, psychological and mental health of certain practices have been gravely aggravated by the HIV/Aids pandemic. Secondly harmful traditional practices often are not really „ African“ but paternalistic.


IV
Art. 5 a CEDAW

Art 5 a CEDAW says:

„ State Parties shall take all appropriate measures:

(a) To modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women,with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women ......“


V
What is to be done ?
The report „ 15 Years of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women – its Causes and Consequences „ in 2009 was initiated an guided by Yakin ERTÜRK.Titled „ Demystifying cultural discourses“ the report says on page 39:

„.......Cultural discourses are a significant source of diverse normative systems that shape power relations between men and women , while the common values across societies have helped develop human rights law reflecting universality and shared culture. Despite the shared values that human rights largely embody, colonial histories,deepening political and economic inequalities, and divisions between an among nations have polarized societies, particularly in the
post-September 11 times. These divisions and inequalities have coalesced with patriarchy to provide fertile ground for cultural discourses.Cultural discourses are manifested in international law, on the one hand, by resorting to cultural justification to resist women´s rights, and through references to primordial and hegemonic interpretation of culture.On the other hand, they are visible in the cultural essentialist targeting of „ traditional societies „ in the global South that are
perceived as harmful to women....“..... “The shift in the responses to cultural discourses .. is evident primarily at two levels: first , through rejection of the term „harmful traditional practices „ and instead adoption of the term „ harmful practices „ in relation to cultural practices
in the familiy that violate women´s rights, and second , through debunking the monolithic static representations for culture ( by both cultural relativists and cultural essentialists) to call for State participation in validating alternative and non-hegemonic interpretations of culture by women and encouraging cultural negotiation.......“


The 2009 South African Report on CEDAW says to Art 5a :

„ The courts have played a critical role in transforming societal beliefs and attitudes through some of their landmark decisions that have fundamentally changed customary and religious practices that voilate women´s human rights...“


My opinion as an expert is that many State Parties of CEDAW should join our bilateral project to enforcing Art 5 a CEDAW.I for myself hope that CEDAW Committee wil pass a new General Recommendation concerning harmful practices against women. I think it is much to do.


*************

LA CEDAW E IL PROTOCOLLO OPZIONALE - DUE IMPORTANTI CONQUISTE GIURIDICHE PER UNA DEMOCRAZIA DI GENERE

CEDAW and Optional Protocol – two important legal steps to gender
democracy

by Dr. Lilian Hofmeister

Relazione tenuta in occasione del seminario di formazione forense “Gli strumenti internazionali per la tutela delle vittime di violenza e discriminazioni di genere”, organizzato da Giuristi Democratici e D.i.RE. Bologna, 14.01.2010.

I Personal approach
II Short history
III Optional Protocol : some remarks
IV The situation in Austria
V Sahide and Fatma are dead !
VI Gender democracy now ?

I
Personal approach
May I introduce myself.
I am from Austria and I have been working as a judge specialised in commercial law since 1976.However, since the 1980ies I have also focussed an the implementation of human rights at the international and national level. I was one of the legal „ghost -writers“ for Ms. Johanna DOHNAL und so one of the mothers of the Austrian Federal Act on Protection against Domestic Violence 1997,a legal milestone. She was the first Austrian Minister for Women´s Affairs and is a famous feminist an lesbian. Not beeing an lawyer herself she had signed and promoted CEDAW. In the 1980ies and 1990ies Austrian´s male leading legal experts denied the existence of that undoubtedly legal binding treaty. During the following years they kept CEDAW secret and did not publish it in their text books and legal editions.
In 1993 I was a delegate at the UN World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna.
In 1995 I was a menber of the Austrian government delegation at the 4th UN World Conference on Women in Beijing. Since 1998 I was appointed Substitute Justice at the Austrian Constitutional Court.
Further, in my capacity as lecturer and communication coach, I have been dealing with the importance and impact of social rules as well as with the issue of group exclusion mechanisms. It is the fate of discriminated groups which is my greatest concern.

II
Short history
In my opinion CEDAW 1979 and its Optional Protocol 1999 certainly are the most important legal instruments in favour of women´s rights as human rights, a political slogan during the Women´s Decade ( 1975 -1985 ) of the UNO which transformed to a legal provision ( Vienna, Beijing : Declaration Art 14 ).

Italy and Austria have a similar development concerning both treaties: They besame member states of the UNO in1955. Both states signed CEDAW in1980 and ratified in the next five years.
The Optional Protocol came into force in 2000 when Italy signed beeing the tenth State Party.
Austria had a special connection to the Optional Protocol: In 1996 the Commission on the Status of Women established a working group to draft a so called „ Optional Protocol „ corresponding to CEDAW. Female individuals should have the permission of a direct application to CEDAW Committee. An individual complaint procedure should be established. Ms. Aloisia WOERGETTER, a young Austrian diplomat,was elected as chairperson and showed great personal commitment.Until March 1999 the working group was active. Finally the chairperson managed to establish this Optional Protocol as a strong and effective instrument. In October 1999 it was adopted by the UN General Assembly.

III
Optional Protocol: some remarks
It is a treaty in its own right and may be signed by those State Parties that have ratified CEDAW.

A woman, a group or somebody on behalf of a woman can send communications to CEDAW Committee, if a State Party of both treaties is suspected to have violates a woman´s right that is guaranteed under CEDAW Convention.
The state in question must have ratified both treaties before the violation. It is not necessary that the woman concerned is a national of this state,she must only be under the sovereignty and the laws. The communications must be written and must not be anonymous. A representative on behalf of a woman must prove her consent.
All national available remedies must have been exhausted. Etc.etc.

IV
The situation in Austria
CEDAW Art 1 – 4 was ratified on federal constitutional level. The treaty was non--self-executing, so feminists and NGO´s demanded the implementation into the national legal framework.
Some examples:
a. Art 7 of the Austrian Federal Constitution was repeatedly amended adapting positive actions ( Art 4 CEDAW ).
b. Family law was „ gendered „ in several legal steps.
c.Quotas for women at the universities, at the courts and other authorities of the state,in the army and in the civil service were established in many ( ordinary) laws.
Summarizing I can say that the implementation of CEDAW was a success. Before 1995, the year when Austria joined the EU, human rights for women exclusively derived from CEDAW transforming the rule of law.
It is a matter of fact that CEDAW does not refer explicitly to violence against women.
So it is verv important to know that several so called General Recommendations by CEDAW Committee addresses this fundamental issue:
Nr 12 /1989 on violence against women
Nr 14/ 1990 on female circumcision ( FGM) and other traditional practises harmful to
the health of women
Nr 19/ 1992 on violence against women.
Art 1 CEDAW includes all forms of gender-based violence which is defined as „ violence that is directed against a woman because she is a woman or that affects women disproportionately.“ The full enjoyment of human rights , especially the right to life; the right not to be subject to torture or to cruel , inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; the right to equal protection under the laws.
In 1992 Johanna DOHNAL started the campaign „ Test the West - Gender Democracy and Violence „.In her opening address she said:
„ Speaking about violence is a difficult undertaking for various reasons: Day in , day out, we are confronted with images of violence, both through the media and in our own lives.Our range of reactions includes dismay, revulsion, anxiety; but also indifference,resignation and ignorance. We do live in a modern democratic society,but violence is at the same time an everyday fact.....Throughout the whole long history of patriarchy women have had to put up with violence. They are subject to gender-based discrimination ,they are faced with disadvantages , and they have never been permitted to live a life of self-determination. Humans who are denied an identity of their own, who are denied the right to be different, who are economically dependent or who are not given access to education and refused personal development,have always been victims of violence....“
Famous experts from abroad come to Vienna and spoke to us about the context between structural violence against women and gender democracy.

Catharine A. MacKinnon, Susan Schechter, Ellen Pence , Charlotte Bunch, Alberto Godenzi , Erica Fischer , Susanne Baer and others were our lecturers.

Especially the information about the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project in DULUTH/ Minnesota-USA was an inspiration for us. Then we – some feminists and NGO-representatives - eloborated a draft concerning an Anti-Domestic-Violence-Act. We had to fight against the male
staff of traditional lawyers from two ministries ( Justice and Home Affairs ). In May 1997 the Federal Act on Protection against Domestic Violence entered into force.It was a victory against the establishment of Austrian lawmakers! For women it was really a milestone because it represents a major paradigm shift: The focus is on the safety and needs of the ( female ) victim She is not obliged to leave her home. She receives protection by specialized NGO´s, so called intervention centres.On the other hand the perpetrator has to leave the home and is not allowed to contact the victim.There are new legal remedies like eviction orders by the police or/and „ interim injunctions „ under civil enforcement law.Undoubtedly the adoption of this federal act was an important step to incorporate the spirit of CEDAW into the Austrian legislation.
But from the start we „ mothers „ of that act knew that the remedies against domestic violence are only useful in cases with moderate, not really severe attacks by a perpetrator who is not a criminal. The new remedies were created in addition to the possibilities by criminal law, especially the imposition of detention.
The turning point is to assess the aggressor´s potential for further violence in a realistic way and to consider the possibility of further escalation !

V
Sahide and Fatma are dead
In September 2009 there was a conference of WAVE in Vienna. Ms.Rosa LOGAR, director of the Domestic Abuse Intervention Program Vienna andone of the founders of the Austrian Women´s Shelter Movement, spoke about two Austrian cases at CEDAW Committee and the consequences for Austria.
She told us about two women in the age of 35 to 45 years with ethnic roots in Turkey.Fatma became citizen of Austria. Both lived in Vienna.Both were murdered by their husbands in 2002 und 2003, although they had demanded protection by police and judicial authorities . Before their deaths they repeatedly suffered from threats and violent acts which had been reported. Although both offenders were evicted from their homes, the police ( in one case ) and the public prosecutor ( in both cases ) failed in assessing the actual danger for the victims that emanated from the perpetrators. Even Sahides husband had had a weapon but nobody seemed to be interested in this fact.No detention order was obtained, both male were only charged without arrest. After the murders both husbands were sentenced to life imprisonment . Sahide and Fatma had been clients of the Austrian Domestic Abuse Intervention Centre. To its duties belong counselling for victims of domestic violence and assisting Them in order to enforce their rights.

So in behalf of both women communications were sent to Cedaw Committee ( 5/2005 and 6/2005 ).It was argued that Austria had violated the rights of Sahide and Fatma under Art 1,2,3 and 5 CEDAW , because the authorities of the State Party had not taken all appropriate measures to protect their lives.
Roa LOGAR:
„ .......At its 39 th session in August 2007 the CEDAW Committee decided that Austria , in both cases, had violated the rights of the two women to protection to their lives and physical integrity according to Art 2 a and c to f of the CEDAW Convention , together with Art 3 and General Recommendation Nr 19 of the CEDAW Committee......“
„ The Committee therefore .. considers the failure not to have detained I.Y....as having been in breach of the State Party´s due diligence obligation to protect Fatma...

In both cases the CEDAW Committee acknowledges the fact that Austria´s domestic violence law established a comprehensive model of protection from domestic abuse.
However, the Committee emphasizes that this is not enough since the political will as expressed in the law must be supported by State actors put into practice the State´s due diligence obligations . In other words : it is not enough to have good laws, they also have to be enforced by all actors.
Regarding Austria´s argument that detention would have been disproportionate, the Committee notes in both cases that although it has to be considered for each case individually wether detention would disproportionately interfere in a suspect´s fundamental and human rights,“ the perpetrator´s right can not supersede women´s human rights to life und to physical and mental integrity ......“
CEDAW Committee made a number of recommendations to Austria .
Meanwhile Austria has reacted improving the legal framework ( Anti-stalking; Victim´s Protection etc.)It is a pity that training programs for judges, public prosecutors, lawyers and law enforcement officials are not established for lack of budget.

So it could occur again that Austrian authorities suppose – by error - death threats of male perpetrators against their wifes , sisters , daughters , mothers and other female relatives are only „ couple disputs „ or „disturbances „ or „ conflicts with a certain cultural background „.

V
Gender democracy now ?
Ms. Rashida MANJOO, the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, sent a message to the recent WAVE-Conference:
„...Violence against women is both universal and particular. It is universal in that there is no region of the world, no country and no culture in which women´s freedom from violence has been secured. The pervasiveness of violence against women accross the boundaries of nation, culture, race, class and religion points to its roots in patriarchy – the systemic domination of women ba men.The many forms and manifestations of violence and women´s differing experiences of violence point to the intersection between gender-bades subordination and other forms of subordination experienced by women in specific context ( Secretary-General´s report „ Ending violence against women – from words to action „ 2006 page 28 ).
Despite the existence of provisions on non-discrimination on the basis of sex in formal international legal instruments since 1945......the promotion and protection of women´s human rights remains a challenge......“

30 years CEDAW – 10 years Optional Protocol : It was even not enough time to transform European democracies ! To use CEDAW for many cases of gender-based discrimination would support and accelerate the enforcement of women´s rights as human rights.
***********************

LE PROCEDURE SPECIALI E IL MANDATO DELLA SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ONU SULLA VIOLENZA CONTRO LE DONNE

Special Procedures and Mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on violence against women, its causes and consequences

Relazione di Rashida Manjoo, Special Rapporteur ONU sulla violenza contro le donne, presentata nel corso del seminario di formazione forense organizzato da Giuristi Democratici e D.i.RE a Bologna il 14.01.2010

1. What are Special Procedures

"Special procedures" is the general name given to the mechanisms established by the Commission on Human Rights and later the Human Rights Council, to address either specific country situations or thematic issues in all parts of the world. Currently, there are 39 thematic and 8 country mandates (1). The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) provides these mechanisms with personnel, logistical and research assistance to support them in the discharge of their mandates.

Special procedure mandates usually call on mandate holders to examine, monitor, advise and publicly report on human rights situations in specific countries or territories (referred to as country mandates), or on major phenomena of human rights violations worldwide (referred to as thematic mandates). Special procedures are either an individual (bearing the title of "Special Rapporteur", "Special Representative of the Secretary-General", "Representative of the Secretary-General" or "Independent Expert") or a working group usually composed of five members (one from each region).

The mandates of the special procedures are established and defined by the resolution creating them. Mandate-holders of the special procedures serve in their personal capacity, and do not receive salaries or any other financial compensation for their work. The independent status of the mandate-holders is crucial in order to be able to fulfil their functions in all impartiality. A mandate-holder’s tenure in a given function, whether a thematic or country mandate, will be of no longer than six years (two terms of three years for thematic mandate-holders).

2. Mandate of the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on violence against women, its causes and consequences

In its resolution 1994/45, adopted on 4 March 1994, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights decided to appoint a Special Rapporteur on violence against women, including its causes and consequences. The mandate was assumed by the Human Rights Council pursuant to General Assembly resolution 60/251 of 2006 and Human Rights Council decision 2006/102. In March 2008, the mandate was extended for a period of three years by Human Rights Council resolution 7/24.

According to her mandate, the Special Rapporteur is requested to:

(a) Seek and receive information on violence against women, its causes and consequences, from Governments, treaty bodies, specialised agencies, other Special Rapporteurs responsible for various human rights questions, and intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations, including women's organisations, and to respond effectively to such information;

(b) Recommend measures, ways and means, at the local, national, regional and international levels, to eliminate violence against women and its causes, and to remedy its consequences;

(c) Work closely with other special procedures and human rights mechanisms of the Council and with the treaty bodies, taking into account the request of the Council that they regularly and systematically integrate the human rights of women and a gender perspective into their work, and cooperate closely with the Commission on the Status of Women in the discharge of its functions;

(d) Adopt a comprehensive and universal approach to the elimination of violence against women, its causes and consequences, including causes of violence against women related to the civil, cultural, economic, political and social spheres.

The definition of violence against women used by the Special Rapporteur follows the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women, adopted by the General Assembly in its resolution 48/104 on December 1993 . The Declaration defines violence against women as any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.

In the discharge, of the mandate the Special Rapporteur:

· Submits annual thematic reports to the Human Rights Council

The Special Rapporteur has been requested to submit an annual report on the activities undertaken and themes analysed under the mandate to the Human Rights Council. The thematic reports in the last several years have focused on the following topics: political economy and violence against women (2009); indicators on violence against women and State response to it (2008); the relationship between culture and violence against women (2007); the due diligence obligation to prevent and combat violence against women (2006); and intersections between HIV/AIDS and violence against women (2005). In addition to her thematic report, in 2009 the Special Rapporteur also issued a critical review of the 15 years of work of the mandate(2). The Special Rapporteur’s thematic report for 2010 will explore the issue of reparations and compensation for violence against women who have been subjected to violence. Future thematic reports will look into prevention strategies to combat violence against women and intersectionality between violence against women and multiple forms of discrimination.

· Undertakes fact-finding country visits

Mandate holders also carry out 2 or 3 country visits (‘field missions’) a year to investigate the situation of human rights at the national level. These country visits can be carried out separately or jointly with other Special Rapporteurs or working groups. Mandate holders typically send a letter to the Government requesting to visit the country and, if the Government agrees, an invitation to visit is extended. Some countries have issued a "standing invitation”, which is an open invitation extended by a Government to all thematic special procedures. By extending a standing invitation States announce that they will always accept visit requests from all special procedures. As of July 2009, a total of 66 countries had extended a standing invitation to thematic procedures. .

During such missions, the experts assess the general human rights situation in a given country, as well as the specific institutional, legal, judicial, administrative and de facto situation under their respective mandates. During the country visit the experts will meet with national and local authorities, including members of the judiciary and parliamentarians; members of the national human rights institution, if applicable; civil society organizations and victims of human rights violations; the UN and other inter-governmental agencies; and the press when giving a press-conference at the end of the mission. After their visits, special procedures mandate-holders present mission reports containing their findings and recommendations to the Human Rights Council.

Since the inception of the mandate in 1994, the Special Rapporteur on violence against women has visited and issued country reports on a total of 37 countries. The mandate has recently requested invitations to visit Zimbabwe, USA, El salvador and Somalia in 2010.

The Special Rapporteur has also conducted some country visits jointly with other mandate holders or in collaboration with other regional bodies and mechanisms. Examples include: the joint mission to Moldova with Manfred Nowak, Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in July 2008; the mission to Darfur with the Special Rapporteur on Women’s Rights of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights in September 2004; and the joint visit to Turkey in November 2008 with the European Parliament’s Rapporteur on Women’s Rights.

Terms of Reference for Fact-finding missions by Special Procedures

The terms of reference for country visits were adopted at the fourth annual meeting of the Special Rapporteurs (E/CN.4/1998/45) and are intended to guide Governments in the conduct of the visit. During fact-finding missions, special procedures mandate holders as well as United Nations staff accompanying them, should be given the following guarantees and facilities by the Government that invited them to visit its country:

(a) Freedom of movement in the whole country, including facilitation of transport, in particular to restricted areas;
(b) Freedom of inquiry (3);
(c) Assurance by the Government that persons, whether officials or private individuals, who have been in contact with the special Rapporteur/representative in relation to the mandate, will not, as a result, suffer threats, harassment or punishment or be subjected to judicial proceedings;
(d) Appropriate security arrangements without, however, restricting the freedom of movement and inquiry referred to above;
(e) Extension of the same guarantees and facilities mentioned above to the appropriate United Nations staff who will assist the special Rapporteur before, during and after the visit.

· Transmits communications to Member States on reported human rights violations

The Special Rapporteur transmits urgent appeals and allegation letters (communications) to States addressing reported individual cases and general situations of concern to her mandate. The communications, always sent with the victim’s consent, are based on reliable and credible information received from governments, intergovernmental organizations or civil society.

The dialogue established with governments by the Special Rapporteur and the transmission of allegations concerning their countries in no way implies any kind of accusation or value judgment on the part of the Special Rapporteur, but rather a request for clarification that aims to ensure, in cooperation with the government concerned, the effective prevention, investigation, and punishment of acts of violence against women as well as compensation for victims of such violations.

VAW communications sent in 2008:

In 2008, a total 911 communications were sent by special procedures as a whole to Governments in 118 countries. 66% of these were joint communications of two or more mandate holders (4).
From 5 December 2007 to 2 April 2009, the VAW mandate sent 93 communications to 34 Member States during 2008 (5). These communications addressed a wide variety of issues and forms of violence against women, such as: assaults and/or rapes perpetrated by police officers, governmental forces and other armed actors; threats and attacks against women human rights defenders; stoning of women on allegations of adultery; abductions and rapes of girls; female genital mutilation; and discriminatory legislation. Of the 34 States concerned, only 19 Governments responded to communications sent by the VAW mandate during that period.

The mandate issues most of its communications jointly with other mandates. Indeed in 2008, 80 out of the 93 communications were sent jointly with other mandate holders, mainly with the mandates on human rights defenders, freedom of expression, and torture. Summaries of all communications sent by the Special Rapporteur and government responses received are published in addenda to the annual thematic reports.



· Participates in consultations with civil society

Consultations with civil society have become an integral part of the work of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its causes and consequences. Some NGOs have been facilitating consultations with the Special Rapporteur since the inception of the mandate.

Regional and national consultations provide important input into the work of the Special Rapporteur by highlighting regional and national specificities, and provide an opportunity for women’s groups from a specific region/country to inform the Special Rapporteur of the violations of women’s rights occurring in their region/country. In addition, some consultations have focused on discussions around the elected topic of the Special Rapporteur’s annual report to the UN Human Rights Council.

Consultations with civil society also allow NGOs to become familiar with opportunities the Special Rapporteur’s mandate offers in advancing their national and regional initiatives. The Special Rapporteur is grateful to those NGOs taking the lead in organising these consultations and encourages them to provide reports on the findings of the consultations or other outcome documents.

3. Entry Points for NGOs

NGOs are an invaluable partner in the work of the Special Rapporteur and the VAW mandate. This is reflected in the longstanding and prominent relationship that the mandate has maintained with NGOs from all regions of the world, including through regular regional consultations. In addition to these consultations, NGOs play a vital role with regard to other regular activities of the mandate, including in the context of the communications procedure and country missions.

Submitting Communications

While some complaints are received directly from individuals affected, the large majority of violations are brought to the attention of the Special Rapporteur by NGOs. This accessible complaint mechanism offers the advantage of not requiring that one exhaust domestic remedies, and can be used in conjunction with other international mechanisms. Although it is not required to use any particular form in submitting a case, a questionnaire is available (attached as an annex to this paper) for this purpose. The minimum information which should be provided in a complaint includes: the identity of the victim, and that of the alleged perpetrator (when known); the identification of the person or organisation submitting the complaint; the date and place of the incident; and a detailed description of the circumstances of the incident in which the violation took place. It is especially important that NGOs ensure and specify that they have obtained the consent of the victim on behalf of whom they are acting. This means that: the victim is aware and agrees that the NGO sends a case to special procedures on her behalf; is informed that if special procedures takes up the case, a letter concerning the alleged violation and containing the victim’s name will be sent to the government; and is also informed that a summary of the case will appear in a public report by the Special Rapporteur. In addition to individual cases of human rights violations, the Special Rapporteur also considers complaints relating to patterns of violations against women and other situations of concern, such as laws or bills which appear to be in violation of women’s rights and likely to lead to violence against women.

Cooperation during Country Visits

In the context of country visits, NGOs also play a key role. NGOs can provide suggestions regarding the countries to visit and the timelines of missions, as well as advise on key issues of concern to women, who to meet with, and places to visit. Furthermore, they often assist in the preparation of missions by informing and working with organisations and communities to prepare meetings with the Special Rapporteur. Country visits offer an important occasion for NGOs not only to voice their concerns, but also their recommendations to the Special Rapporteur. Given the visibility and momentum provided to the issue of VAW by the Special Rapporteur’s visits, they can represent a unique opportunity for NGOs to report on the situation in their country and promote change.

NGOs play a further and critical role in the follow up to the mission, with regard to the dissemination of the Special Rapporteur’s report, and the ongoing monitoring and reporting on the implementation of its recommendations. Some NGOs have taken up the practice of reporting annually on the progress made on these recommendations. This follow up work by NGOs can also be complemented by their contribution to other human rights processes, including through the submission of NGO reports to treaty bodies such as the Committee to CEDAW and submissions in the context of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), in which they continue highlighting the situation of VAW and the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur.

Recent consultations with civil society organisations

· Africa Regional Consultation on sexual violence against women and girls, including in times of peace, Lusaka. Zambia, January 2010.
· Asia Pacific Regional Consultation on violations of women’s sexual and reproductive rights Bangkok, Thailand, December 2009.
· Africa Regional Consultation on violence against women in the context of conflict in the Great Lakes and Horn of Africa Region, Nairobi, Kenya, December 2008. Held jointly with the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders.
· Asia Pacific Regional and National Consultations on violence against indigenous women, New Delhi, India, October 2008. Held jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples.
· CIS/Eastern Europe Regional and National consultations, St-Petersburg, Russian Federation, September 2008.
· Asia Pacific Regional and National Consultations on political economy, globalisation and militarization, Manila, Philippines, September 2007.
· Regional Consultation with women’s organizations from Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan in Tbilisi, Georgia, May 2007 – themes discussed included violence in times of armed conflict, domestic violence and trafficking.
· Europe Regional Consultation, London, United Kingdom, January 2007 – discussions focused on domestic violence and the situation of immigrant and refugee women.
· Asia Pacific Regional and National Consultations on the intersections between culture and violence against women, Ulanbatur, Mongolia, September 2006 (a report of the consultation can be found at: http://www.apwld.org/pdf/NegotiatingCulture.pdf ).
· Africa Regional and National Consultations, Khartum, Sudan, September 2004 – discussions focused on a wide range of issues, from harmful traditional practices to violence against women in situations of armed conflict. Held jointly with the Special Rapporteur of the African Commission on women’s rights in Africa,

(1) A list of all mandates holders is available at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/chr/special/index.htm

(2) A/HRC/11/6/Add.5, 15 Years of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences (1994-2009) – A critical review.

(3) [1] In particular as regards: (i) Access to all prisons, detention centres and places of interrogation;(ii) Contacts with central and local authorities of all branches of government; (iii) Contacts with representatives of non-governmental organizations, other private institutions and the media; (iv) Confidential and unsupervised contact with witnesses and other private persons, including persons deprived of their liberty, considered necessary to fulfil the mandate of the special Rapporteur; and (v) Full access to all documentary material relevant to the mandate.

(4) United Nations Special Procedures, Facts and Figures 2008, OHCHR.

(5) It is noteworthy as well that 40% of communications sent by the VAW mandate in 2008 were to 5 States alone, namely Iran, India, Pakistan, Mexico and Sudan.
****
For further information about the mandate and all available reports please visit the OHCHR website: http://www.ohchr.org/english/issues/women/rapporteur/
For communications to the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, please write to: vaw@ohchr.org

ANNEX

Confidential Violence against Women Information form
PETITIONER: (This information, if taken up by the Special Rapporteur, will remain confidential).
(a) Name of person/ organisation:
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(b) relationship to victim(s)
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(c) Address:
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(d) Fax/tel/e-mail, web-site:
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(e) Date petition sent:
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(f) Other:
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................

2. ALLEGED INCIDENT
(i) information about the victim(s):
(a) Name:
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(b) Sex: ..........................................................................................................................................
(c) Date of Birth or Age: ...............................................................................................................
(d) Nationality:..............................................................................................................................
(e) Occupation: .............................................................................................................................
(f) Ethnic / religious / social background, if relevant:
......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(g) Address:
......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(h) Other relevant information: (such as passport, identity card number):
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

(i) Has the victim(s) given you her consent to send this communication on her behalf?
......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(j) Has the victim(s) been informed that, if the Special Rapporteur decides to take action on her behalf, a letter concerning what happened to her will be sent to the authorities?
......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(k) Is the victim(s) aware that, if this communication is taken up, a summary of what happened to her will appear in a public report of the Special Rapporteur?
......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(l) Would the victim(s) prefer that her full name or merely her initials appear in the public report of the Special Rapporteur?
......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................

(Please note that the full names of victims appear in communications with governments unless it is indicated that exposing the victims’ names to the government would place the victims at risk of further harm. In the public report, the names of victims under the age of 18 and victims of sexual violence will not be disclosed, but initials will be used)

(ii) information regarding the incident:
(a) Detailed description of human rights violation:
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(b) Date: ..................................................... (c) Time: ....................................................
(d) Location/country: .......................................................
(e) Number of assailants: .........
(f) Are the assailant(s) known or related to the victim? If so, how?
......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(g) Name or nickname of assailant(s) (if unknown, description, scars or body marks such as tattoos, clothes/uniform worn, title/status, vehicle used):
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(h) Does the victim believe she was specifically targeted because of her sex?
If yes, why?
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(i) Has the incident been reported to the relevant State authorities? If so, which authorities?
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
When?
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
(j) Have the authorities taken any action after the incident?
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
If so, which authorities?
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
What action?
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
When?
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
(l) If the violation was committed by private individuals or groups (rather than government officials), include any information which might indicate that the Government failed to exercise due diligence to prevent, investigate, punish, and ensure compensation for the violations.
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................
(m) Has the victim seen a doctor after the incident took place? Are there any medical certificates/notes relating to the incident concerned?
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
(iii) Laws or policies which are or are likely to cause or contribute to violence against women
(a) If your submission concerns a law or policy, please summarize it and the effects of its implementation on women’s human rights. Provide concrete examples, when available.
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................................................
Please inform the Special Rapporteur of any further information which becomes available after you have submitted this form, including if your concern has been adequately addressed, or a final outcome has been determined in an investigation or trial, or an action which was planned or threatened has been carried out.

PLEASE RETURN TO
THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS,
OHCHR-UNOG, 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND
(Fax: 00 41 22 917 9006, e-mail: urgent-action@ohchr.org)
© OHCHR 1996-2007

GLI STRUMENTI INTERNAZIONALI PER PROMUOVERE I DIRITTI DELLE DONNE E PROTEGGERE LE VITTIME DI VIOLENZA E DI DISCRIMINAZIONE.

International tools to promote women’s rights and to protect victims of violence and discrimination

(Rome, Bologna and Ravenna – Italy) 13 – 16 Jan 2010)

By Rashida Manjoo - UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women

INTRODUCTION
Thank you for providing me with an opportunity to share information with you on my mandate and also to discuss the challenges of effectively addressing violence against women. It has been stated by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon that: "... there is one universal truth, applicable to all countries, cultures and communities: violence against women is never acceptable, never excusable, [and] never tolerable(1). Violence against women violates the human dignity of women, as well as numerous rights, including the right to equality, non-discrimination, physical integrity and freedom from violence. I believe that equality and equal protection doctrines demand that we address violence against women, in all its manifestations, as discrimination against women.
The protection, promotion and fulfilment of all rights, requires a holistic and intersectional approach. States’ have a responsibility to eliminate violence against women through numerous measures, including through legal and policy frameworks, through a responsive criminal justice system, through the provision of social services and also through economic empowerment policies. The due diligence standard requires States’ to promote the right to be free from all forms of violence, both private and public; and also to develop and implement prevention, protection, punishment and compensation laws, policies and programs. Significant progress achieved in recent years, in the international legal response to violence against women, has resulted in the explicit recognition of violence against women as a human rights concern. However, the reality on the ground shows that many forms and manifestations of violence against women remain endemic around the world, cutting across national boundaries, race, class and religion, amongst other factors.
INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK
Despite the existence of provisions on non-discrimination on the basis of sex in formal international legal instruments since 1945 (e.g. the United Nations Charter and the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women), the promotion and protection of women’s human rights remains a challenge. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (1979) is the most extensive international instrument dealing with the rights of women and girls less than 18 years of age. Although violence against women is not specifically addressed in the Convention, except in relation to trafficking and prostitution (Article 6), many of the anti-discrimination clauses protect women from violence. Relevant provisions in the CEDAW Convention with regard to sexual violence include Article 2 noting the commitment of States Parties to pursue a policy of eliminating discrimination against women, and to adopt legislative and other measures prohibiting all discrimination against women; Article 5 (a) calling on State Parties to take all appropriate measures to modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women; and Article 6 calling on States Parties to take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to suppress all forms of traffic in women and exploitation or prostitution of women.
With the adoption of General Recommendation 19 by the CEDAW Committee (1992), the definition of discrimination against women set out in article 1 of the Convention now includes "gender-based violence - that is violence that is directed against a woman because she is a woman or that affects women disproportionately. It includes acts that inflict physical, mental or sexual harm or suffering, threats of such acts, coercion and other deprivations of liberty". General Recommendation 19 also refers to the prevalence of family violence in all society, including battering, rape, other forms of sexual assault, mental and other forms of violence, which are perpetuated by traditional attitudes.
In 1993 the UN General Assembly adopted the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action which stressed that the human rights of women and girl-children are an inalienable, integral and indivisible part of universal human rights. This declaration also acknowledged that certain gender specific abuses (e.g. violence against women) constitute violations of women’s human rights and, that states have an obligation to eliminate such abuses. In addition, the 1993 Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women and the 1994 Commission on Human Rights Resolution to appoint a Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences, represent a political consensus at the UN level to address the challenges of promoting and protecting women’s human rights generally with a particular focus on addressing the pervasive problem of all forms violence against women.
Violence against women and girl-children, whether occurring in the family, in the general community or perpetrated and condoned by the State, is encompassed in the definition of violence against women provided for in Article 2 of the 1993 UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against women. The Declaration defines VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN as "any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life."

Article 2 states that "violence against women shall be understood to encompass, but not be limited to, the following:
Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring in the family, including battering, sexual abuse of female children in the household, dowry-related violence, marital rape, female genital mutilation and other traditional practices harmful to women, non-spousal violence and violence related to exploitation;
Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring within the general community, including rape, sexual abuse, sexual harassment and intimidation at work, in educational institutions and elsewhere, trafficking in women and forced prostitution;
Physical, sexual and psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by the State, wherever it occurs."
A crucial provision contained in the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women, is Article 4(c). This article of the Declaration refers to the due diligence obligation to prevent, investigate and punish acts of violence against women, whether those acts are perpetrated by the State or by private persons. State responsibility for failing to provide adequate protection against torture and ill-treatment in the home has also been raised by the Human Rights Committee which indicated that domestic violence can give rise to violations of the right not to be subjected to torture or ill-treatment under article 7 of the ICCPR (2). In line with this statement, the Committee has mentioned the need for States to adopt specific legislation combating domestic violence, including legislation criminalizing marital rape (3).
The 1995 Beijing Platform of Action - by including among its 12 critical areas of concern, violence against women, along with women and armed conflict and the human rights of women- specified other forms of sexual violence against women that were not specifically mentioned in the DEVAW. These include violation of the human rights of women in situations of armed conflict, in particular murder, systematic rape, sexual slavery and forced pregnancy (Article 115) and forced sterilization and forced abortion, coercive/forced use of contraceptives, prenatal sex selection and female infanticide (Article 115 bis). The review of the implementation of the Platform for Action, the special session on Beijing +5 that took place during the 23rd Special Session of the General Assembly, in 2000, went a step further in calling for the criminalization of violence against women. The document notes that all governments shall treat all forms of violence against women and girls of all ages as a criminal offence punishable by law, including violence based on all forms of discrimination" (par. 69).
MANDATE OF THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR
The mandate broadly includes the following:
a) Seeking and receiving information on violence against women, its causes and consequences; and responding to such information including via the transmission of urgent appeals and communications to States
b) Recommending measures, ways and means to eliminate violence against women, its causes and remedy its consequences, at the national, regional and international levels
c) Conducting of fact-finding country visits
d) Working with other human rights mechanisms to ensure that they regularly and systematically include in their reports, available information on human rights violation affecting women
e) Cooperating with regional intergovernmental organisations and any other organisations and individuals engaged in the promotion of women’s human rights
f) Furthering the development of international law in this area, including through the submission of relevant annual thematic reports
g) Adopting a comprehensive and universal approach to the elimination of violence against women, its causes and consequences; including causes of violence against women relating to the civil, political, economic, social and cultural spheres.
FUNCTIONING OF THE MANDATE
The Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women places emphasis on the issue of violence in the family, violence in the community and violence perpetrated or condoned by the state. Over the last fifteen years, the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women has evolved at both a conceptual and a practical level. At the conceptual level, the mandate has evolved to capture a wider spectrum of acts as they manifest from the home to the transnational arena i.e. ranging from domestic violence, global trafficking of women, to the impact of globalisation on women. At the practical level, the mandate involves regional networking, implementation of international laws, technical assistance and monitoring of international laws. The current approach emphasises the universality of violence against women, the multiplicity of its forms, the intersectionality of diverse kinds of discrimination against women, and, its linkage to other systems of domination based on inequality and subordination.
The mandate requires an analytical as well as a practical focus to address complex issues and to find concrete ways to move from theory to effective implementation of international standards for the promotion and protection of women’s rights broadly, and the elimination of violence against women, in particular. It also requires a national, regional and international focus which is premised on both historical and current social contexts and realities. The mandate requires engagement with international and regional laws and also international and regional human rights institutions. As regards substantive aspects, a crucial focus relates to the issues of due diligence and state obligations; and impunity and state accountability as regards the realisation of women’s human rights.
The mandate undertook a critical review in 2009 and the report sought to take stock of the achievements of the 15 years of the mandate, including the conceptual and paradigm shifts that have taken place since its inception, the lessons learned and the many challenges still ahead in combating violence against women. The mandate has contributed to ensuring that violence against women is not understood in isolation from gender-based discrimination, but is addressed as part of States’ efforts to ensure gender equality and women’s empowerment. The review reaffirms that the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women is a significant forum which has contributed amongst others to the explicit recognition of violence against women as a human rights concern; has developed legal standards and doctrines for addressing distinct forms of gender-based violence; has stressed the necessity of prevention through tackling root causes of gender inequality; has ruptured the public/private dichotomy by expanding the accountability principle to be applicable to both state and non-state actors; has demonstrated that in situations of armed conflict, that sexual violence is not an outcome of war, but that women’s bodies are an important site of war and that sexual violence is an integral part of wartime strategy, and that there is a strong link between wartime violence and patriarchal gender hierarchies; and finally, the mandate has in many instances, provided another forum for access to justice and accountability.
The 2009 thematic report to the Human Rights Council was devoted to the political economy of women’s human rights. The motivation behind this theme included: (i) the tension between women’s economic/social rights and the prevailing macro-economic policy environment; (ii) the tension caused by the dichotomization of political/civil rights and economic/social rights, which characterizes the latter not as entitlements but as aspirations. This theme was both timely and relevant in the context of the economic crisis the world has experienced over the last year, and also the growing recognition that social and economic rights are essential to women’s ability to enjoy the full range of their human rights. Using a political economy approach the report analyses the challenges of the neo-liberal policy environment and makes explicit the interconnections between the economic, social and political realms. The report demonstrates how power operates not only through coercion but also through the structured relations of production and reproduction that govern the distribution and use of resources, benefits, privileges and authority within the home and society at large. Yet, this is often neglected in the analyses of women’s human rights and is rarely included in strategies to address violence against them.
The report focuses on the long standing feminist critique of the dichotomization between the ‘first generation’ and ‘second generation’ rights as contained in the two Covenants. We know that unless women can develop their capabilities and achieve economic independence, the human rights they are promised will remain abstract concepts. The primacy accorded to civil and political rights has perpetuated a bias toward violations of human rights in the public sphere. The report looks at the specific linkages between violence against women and women’s access to particular economic and social rights, such as the right to housing, land and property, food, water, health, education, and the right to decent work and social security. Thus, demonstrating that economic and social security is crucial for enhancing women’s capabilities, their empowerment and for preventing violence against women. In this respect, a strong appeal is made in that report for the adoption of an integrated perspective that combines the obligations set out in both Covenants. The findings in the report stress that the current approaches to understanding and responding to violence against women should be broadened to take account of causes and consequences of violence which is often evident in women’s poverty and labour exploitation, their socio-economic inequality with men, and their exclusion from decision-making, both in the private and public sector.
CONCLUSION
Based on a preliminary review of the work of the mandate over the last 15 years, as well as the broader body of work on women’s human rights during this period, I have identified a number of areas which would require focused and timely attention. With regard to the due diligence standard, the review report highlights two areas that require further conceptual development. These include the issue of redress and reparations for wrongs committed (both by omission and commission) by the State, its agents and non-State actors and secondly, the issue of prevention measures. In my thematic report to the Human Rights Council in 2010, I propose to address the former issue. Both CEDAW and DEVAW place upon the State the duty to prevent, investigate, punish and provide compensation for all acts of violence wherever they occur. Article 4 of DEVAW states that women who are subjected to violence should be informed about and provided with access to the mechanisms of justice, as well as to just and effective remedies for the harm that they have suffered, as provided by national legislation.
The upcoming Beijing +15 and the review of the implementation of the Platform for Action; the 30th anniversary celebrations and reflections on the achievements of the CEDAW; and the recent Security Council Resolution 1888 strengthening the response to the issue of sexual violence in conflict situations, all provide us with the opportunity to intensify our efforts towards protection, prosecution, prevention and provision of effective redress to women who have been subjected to violence. It is only by placing women’s human rights, including the right to be safe from violence, at the center of such efforts that we will be able to build a more secure world, based on the common goal and the shared obligation of ensuring that human rights are universally and equally enjoyed.
The Secretary-General’s campaign titled "UNiTE to end violence against women" identifies five key outcomes in its Framework of Action. These include:
The adoption and enforcement of national laws.
The adoption and implementation of multi-sectoral national plans of action that emphasise prevention and are adequately resourced.
The establishment of data collection and analysis systems, on the prevalence of various forms of violence against women and girls.
The establishment of national and/or local campaigns and the engagement of civil society in preventing violence and in supporting women and girls who have been abused.
The adoption of systematic efforts to address sexual violence in conflict situations and to protect women and girls from rape as a tactic of war, and the full implementation of related laws and policies.
The above outcomes and also the due diligence standard provides us with an opportunity to address impunity and to demand accountability. Holding both state and non-state actors accountable for acts of violence against women is an imperative that cannot be ignored.
Thank you.

(1) http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2008/sgsm11437.doc.htm

(2) Human Rights Committee general comment No. 28 (2000) on article 3 (The equality of rights between men and women), para. 11.

(3) See CCPR/CO/79/LKA, para. 20.

LA COSTITUZIONE DI PARTE CIVILE DI ENTI, ASSOCIAZIONI, SINDACATI, NEI PROCESSI PER REATI INTEGRANTI VIOLENZA DI GENERE

AVV. MONICA MISEROCCHI - Giuristi Democratici

PARTE PRIMA

I) LEGITTIMAZIONE ALL’AZIONE CIVILE(art. 74 c.p.p.)

-Soggetto danneggiato dal reato

-Successori universali del danneggiato

Sono i soggetti legittimati ad esperire l’azione civile nel processo penale ai fini del risarcimento dei danni patrimoniali e non patrimoniali ex art. 185 c.p. nei confronti del colpevole.

II) CHI E’ SOGGETTO DANNEGGIATO DAL REATO?

- Persona fisica

- Comitati, associazioni non riconociute, collettivi

- Enti pubblici o privati e associazioni fornite di personalità giuridica

III) LIMITE ALL’ESERCIZIO DELLA AZIONE CIVILE NEL PROCESSO PENALE

- Dopo l’esercizio della azione penale

- Termine perentorio: udienza preliminare, e fino agli adempimenti ex 484 c.p.p.

NON CONSENTITA l'azione civile nel processo penale*:

a) nell’udienza fissata a seguito di istanza ex art. 444 c.p.p. presentata nel corso delle indagini preliminari

b) nell’udienza fissata a seguito di patteggiamento concordato successivamente alla richiesta di giudizio immediato del P.M.

* CASS. SU., 27.11.2008, N. 47803

IV)I REQUISITI PER LA LEGITTIMAZIONE DEGLI ENTI ESPONENZIALI DI INTERESSI DIFFUSI O COLLETTIVI

1) Quando dall’offesa all’interesse tutelato dalla norma penale derivi una lesione del diritto del sodalizio con riferimento allo scopo e ai suoi componenti.
(L'attività dell’ente deve avere per scopo ideale esplicito e specifico la tutela del bene giuridico offeso dal reato)

2) Quando c’è continuità e rilevanza del contributo concretamente apportato dall’ente alla difesa del bene giuridico leso dal reato
(L'attività dell’ente deve effettivamente in concreto essere rivolta alla tutela del bene giuridico leso dal reato)

ORDINANZA 22.10.2008, Tribunale di Torino – THYSSENKRUUPP

L’ordinanza ammette la parte civile Medicina Democratica e dispone invece l’esclusione della Codacons perchè, in relazione al punto 1:
« (...) le finalità dell’associazione (Codacons) che possono leggersi nello Statuto presentano una evidente genercità di formulazione, in primo luogo sono del tutto assenti nello Statuto indicazione di una qualche specificità con riguardo alla realizzazione della salute nei luoghi di lavoro ed alla salubrità dio questi ultimi, mentre dalla lettura dello statuto di Medicina Democratica onlus emerge che l’attenzione alla salute nei luoghi di lavoro ed all’ ambiente di lavoro sostanzia una finalità specifica dell’agire dell’associazione (...) »

Iin relazione al punto 2:
« (...) nè pare sufficiente (a dimostrare la concreta attività dell’ente) il coinvolgimento della Codacons in iniziative di studio del d. Lgs. 81/2008 oppure la partecipazione a convegni su temi attinenti il lavoro, attesa la loro episodicità, mentre a favore dell’ammissione di Medicina Democratica è valsa l’abbondante documentazione allegata all’atto di costituzione in particolare il n. del febbraio 2008 della rivista pubblicata dall’associazione non a caso denominata « Lavoro e salute »

GIP, Trib. di Napoli, ordinanza 02.03.2007 - conforme GIP, Trib. di Rimini, ordinanza 15.07.2008
« Nella fase preliminare del procedimento, nel giudizio di ammissibilità e/o esclusione dell’ente non è consentito al giudice di anticipare un giudizio di merito sulla fondatezza dell’istanza risarcitoria, neanche in via meramente probabilistica o presuntiva »

PARTE SECONDA

DEFINIZIONE DEL DANNO PER REATI INTEGRANTI VIOLENZA DI GENERE

V) DEFINIZIONE di DISCRIMINAZIONE E VIOLENZA DI GENERE

(Art. 1 CEDAW)
Ogni distinzione esclusione o limitazione basata sul genere, che abbia come conseguenza, o come scopo, di compromettere o distruggere il riconoscimento, il godimento o l'esercizio da parte delle donne, quale che sia il loro stato matrimoniale, dei diritti umani e delle libertà fondamentali in campo politico, economico, sociale, culturale e civile o in ogni altro campo, su base di parità tra l'uomo e la donna.

VI) FATTISPECIE PENALI CHE COSTITUISCONO VIOLENZA DI GENERE (FEMMINICIDIO):

- VIOLENZA SESSUALE
- ATTI SESSUALI CON MINORENNE
- MALTRATTAMENTI
- ATTI PERSECUTORI
ovvero
- MOLESTIE E INGIURIE
- OMICIDIO
- PROCURATO ABORTO
- LESIONI
- PERCOSSE
- VIOLENZA PRIVATA
- (ecc.)

Nel caso in cui l’azione venga posta in essere come espressione di misoginia o come atto di controllo, di potere, di vendetta da parte dell’uomo sulla donna per il solo fatto di essere donna, ovvero in forza di un rapporto relazionale fondato sulla disparità.

VII) DANNO DA VIOLENZA DI GENERE

I diritti delle donne sono diritti umani, (Quarta Conferenza Mondiale sulle donne delle Nazioni Unite, tenutasi a Pechino nel 1995 e ss.).

La violenza sulle donne intesa come abuso, sopraffazione, limitazione delle libertà personali, disparità di trattamento e sottrazione di opportunità, violazione di diritti, rappresenta una violazione dei diritti fondamentali della persona, ed anche un fenomeno che coinvolge l’intera struttura della società ovvero la vita sociale in tutte le sue articolazioni.

In ragione di ciò, si può affermare che il danno causato dalla violenza di genere ha una triplice dimensione lesiva:

1) PERSONALE

2) SOCIALE

3) PUBBLICA

DIMENSIONE PERSONALE DEL DANNO
(danno vittima)

lesione del diritto fondamentale all’integrità psico-fisica di ogni persona

DIMENSIONE SOCIALE DEL DANNO
(danno associazione, sindacato)

Lesione dei diritti inviolabili nelle formazioni sociali in cui si sviluppa la personalità umana ex art. 2 Cost.

DIMENSIONE PUBBLICA DEL DANNO
(danno enti pubblici)

Lesione del diritto-dovere pubblico spettante alle istituzioni centrali e periferiche di garantire l’integrità psicofisica delle/dei propri consociati e di eliminare ogni ostacolo di ordine economico e sociale che, limitando di fatto la libertà e l’eguaglianza dei cittadini impedisca il pieno sviluppo della persona umana, ex art. 3 Cost.

VIII) LA COSTITUZIONE DI PARTE CIVILE DEL SINDACATO

LEGITTIMAZIONE AD AGIRE DEL SINDACATO

La capacità di esercitare l’azione civile compete alle relative rappresentanze senza necessità di uno specifico mandato da parte dei lavoratori
(Tribunale di Monza, 9.06.2003)

Il sindacato è legittimato anche nell’ipotesi in cui il lavoratore parte offesa non sia neppure iscritto (COBAS)

La scarsa rappresentatività non rileva ai fini della costituzione di parte civile fondata sulle finalità statutarie e sull’art. 9 Statuto Lavoratori, ma unicamente ai fini della determinazione dell’ammontare del risarcimento del danno che dovrà tener conto del ridotto numero di iscritti della associazione sindacale.
( Tribunale Bergamo, 25.06.2008, n. 1695)

SINDACATO PARTE CIVILE PER VIOLENZE SESSUALI SUL LAVORO

Cass. Pen. Sez. III, 26.03.2008 n. 12738

In tema di reati sessuali, il S.i.u.l.p. (Sindacato italiano unitario lavoratori polizia) è legittimato a costituirsi parte civile, non quale ente rappresentativo di interessi diffusi ma quale danneggiato dal reato di violenza sessuale commesso da un dirigente nei confronti di una sottoposta, agente ad esso iscritta, al fine di ottenere il ristoro del danno subito.

Perché il sindacato è danneggiato dal reato? (danno sociale)

« La soluzione adottata dai giudici di merito e' allineata con i principi enunciati in materia da questa Corte regolatrice (sez. 3, 3.12.2007 n. 15983; sez. 6, 314/1990, rv. 185501), secondo cui un soggetto puo' costituirsi parte civile non soltanto quando il danno riguardi un bene su cui egli vanti un diritto patrimoniale, ma piu' in generale quando il danno coincida con la lesione di un diritto soggettivo del soggetto stesso, come avviene nel caso in cui offeso sia l'interesse perseguito da un'associazione in riferimento a una situazione storicamente circostanziata, da essa associazione assunto nello statuto a ragione stessa della propria esistenza ed azione, come tale oggetto di un diritto assoluto ed essenziale dell'ente a causa dell'immedesimazione fra il sodalizio e l'interesse perseguito. »

« In tal caso, infatti, l'interesse storicizzato individua il sodalizio, con l'effetto che ogni attentato all'interesse in esso incarnatosi si configura come lesione del diritto di personalita' o all'identita', che dir si voglia, del sodalizio stesso. Alla stregua di tale principio, in tema di legittimazione di persone giuridiche e di enti di fatto a costituirsi parte civile, deve conclusivamente ritenersi che quando l'interesse diffuso alla tutela di un bene giuridico non e' solo astrattamente configurato, ma si concretizza in una determinata realta' storica di cui il sodalizio ha fatto il proprio scopo diventando la ragione e, per cio', elemento costitutivo di esso, e' ammissibile la costituzione di parte civile di tale ente, sempre che dal reato sia derivata una lesione di un diritto soggettivo inerente allo scopo specifico perseguito. »

Il sindacato è direttamente danneggiato dalla condotta dell’imputato in quanto lesiva del preciso fine perseguito dall’ente.
Alla stregua di tale disposizione e del principio sopra enunciato, deve ritenersi che la condotta integrante reato lede direttamente la parte lesa, ma risulta idonea, per la concomitante incidenza sulla dignita‘ lavorativa e sulla serenita' del lavoratore che ne e' vittima, a creare danno al sindacato, in quanto in contrasto con il preciso fine dal medesimo perseguito e cioe' quello che, ex cit. articolo 4 dello Statuto, e' proprio di tutelare la condizione lavorativa e di vita degli iscritti sul luogo di lavoro.

Il SIULP, quindi, riveste la qualita' di soggetto danneggiato dalla condotta criminosa, in difesa del proprio diritto alla protezione dell'interesse collettivo dei lavoratori di Polizia, in particolare di un proprio iscritto, avendo il reato palesemente violato la tutela della salute fisica e psichica del lavoratore sul luogo di lavoro.

Ne deriva che il reato ascritto all'imputato ha arrecato un danno diretto e immediato al SIULP, concretizzatosi nella lesione del prestigio e della credibilita' dello stesso, derivante dalla vanificazione del perseguimento e della realizzazione dei fini istituzionali propri di tale organismo collettivo, quali la tutela della salute e dell'integrita' psico-fisica dei lavoratori.

IX) LA COSTITUZIONE DI PARTE CIVILE DELLE ASSOCIAZIONI

ASSOCIAZIONE GIURISTI DEMOCRATICI PARTE CIVILE PER FEMMINICIDIO(maltrattamenti + omicidio + procurato aborto)

La costituzione di parte civile delle associazioni è ammissibile quando l'interesse diffuso alla tutela del bene protetto non è astrattamente connotato ma si concretizza in una determinata realtà storica di cui il sodalizio ha fatto il proprio scopo e che è diventata la ragione e, perciò, elemento costitutivo di esso, purché - comunque- dal reato sia derivata una lesione di un diritto soggettivo inerente lo scopo specifico perseguito in concreto.

Le associazioni, ivi comprese quelle a carattere locale e non riconosciute, in quanto formazioni sociali nelle quali si svolge dinamicamente la personalità di ogni uomo, titolare di diritti inalienabili, possono costituirsi parti civili in quanto abbiano dato prova di continuità della loro azione, aderenza al territorio, rilevanza del loro contributo. In tal caso l'interesse diffuso da esse perseguito è rivolto alla salvaguardia di una situazione storicamente circostanziata, la quale è stata fatta propria dal sodalizio come suo scopo specifico [vedi Cass., Sez. III, 21.5.1993, n. 5230, P.C. in proc. Tessarolo e 13.11.1992, n. 10956, P.M. in proc. Serlenga ed altri].

CASS. sez. III, 10.06.2002, n. 22539


I DIRITTI DELLE DONNE SONO DIRITTI UMANI.
Associazione a tutela dei diritti umani parte civile in un processo per reati integranti violenza di genere.

GUP, Tribunale di Perugia, 18.03.2008
"Venendo ai due enti la cui costituzione viene contestata dalla difesa, si rileva in effetti che i rispettivi fini statutari hanno portata decisamente più ampia, e che in entrambi i casi le condotte. ascritte all'imputato possono intendersi lesive di situazioni giuridiche che quelle associazioni potrebbero rappresentare al pari di diritti decisamente diversi: ergo, si tratta di condotte che non verrebbero a minare quella che potrebbe intendersi la ragione ontologica degli enti.

Tuttavia, non sembra potersi ragionevolmente confondere la genesi di un ente con quella che poi ne diventa la manifestazione concreta nel contesto sociale in cui viene ad operare, e d'altro canto è evidente che – in prospettiva - un'associazione più direttamente coinvolta e colpita nella sua essenza potrà vantare ragioni di risarcimento superiori a quelle azionabili da un ente portatore di interessi diffusi di taglio più generale: ovviamente, si tratterebbe di questioni di merito sulla valutazione in concreto delle domande, non già sull'ammissibilità delle stesse ancora a monte.

Come anche argomentato nei due atti di costituzione, è comprovato attraverso i documenti allegati, se è vero che la tutela delle donne non rappresentava l'unica ragion d'essere dei "Giuristi Democratici" o di "Ossigeno Onlus", essa ne è sicuramente diventata - anche nell'immagine che la collettività riconosce oggi alle due associazioni, il che ha le sue rilevanti implicazioni in punto di eventuali danni non patrimoniali conseguenti a condotte criminose - un obiettivo specifico di azione e di interesse, portando entrambe le associazioni in questione ad organizzare sul tema iniziative di rilievo nazionale, nonché ad assurgere a punti di riferimento financo in sede di osservazioni su progetti di riforme legislative.

Si conviene con la difesa circa la necessità di dettare dei limiti concreti alla costituzione di parte civile in situazioni come quella in esame, correndosi altrimenti il rischio di legittimare l'ingresso nei processi penali anche a soggetti che abbiano meri principi generali di riferimento, magari contenuti in semplici richiami alle prime norme della Costituzione; tuttavia, si ribadisce, la valutazione va fatta in concreto, analizzando quelle che potevano essere le precipue ragioni che portarono anni addietro alcuni soggetti ad associarsi, ma soprattutto in che modo le associazioni così venute ad esistenza abbiano operato concretamente per la tute-la dei diritti posti a fondamento delle istanze risarcitorie.

Da ultimo, va considerato che per tutti gli enti è stato congruamente dedotto il radicamento nel territorio della Regione dell'Umbria, a sostegno del rapporto di immediata derivazione causale dalla condotta dell'imputato dei danni rispettivamente lamentati".

X) LA COSTITUZIONE COME PARTE CIVILE DI ENTI PUBBLICI

DIMENSIONE PUBBLICA DEL DANNO LEGITTIMAZIONE AD AGIRE DEGLI ENTI PUBBLICI

“Avverte ancora il giudice delle leggi che "risulta superata la considerazione secondo cui il diritto al risarcimento del danno sorge solo a seguito della perdita finanziaria contabile nel bilancio dell'ente pubblico, cioè della lesione del patrimonio dell'ente, non incidendosi su un bene appartenente altro Stato ... La legittimazione ad agire, che è attribuita allo Stato ed agli enti minori, non trova fondamento nel fatto che essi hanno affrontato spese per riparare il danno, o nel fatto che essi abbiano subito una perdita economica ma nella loro funzione a tutela della collettività e delle comunità nel proprio ambito territoriale e degli interessi all'equilibrio ecologico, biologico e sociologico del territorio che ad essi fanno capo".

Cass. pen., sez. III, n. 22539 del 10.06.2002


Cassazione Sezione 6, n. 59/1990, Monticelli, RV. 182947

"Gli enti e le associazioni sono legittimati all'azione risarcitoria. anche in sede penale mediante costituzione di parte civile, ove dal reato abbiano ricevuto un danno a un interesse proprio, sempre che l'interesse leso coincida con un diritto reale o comunque con un diritto soggettivo del sodalizio, e quindi anche se offeso sia l'interesse perseguito in riferimento a una situazione storicamente circostanziata, da esso sodalizio preso a cuore e assunto nello statuto a ragione stessa della propria esistenza e azione, come tale oggetto di un diritto assoluto ed essenziale dell'ente”.

“Ciò sia a causa dell'immedesimazione fra l'ente stesso e l'interesse perseguito, sia a causa dell'incorporazione fra i soci e il sodalizio medesimo, sicchè questo, per l'affectio societatis verso l'interesse prescelto e per il pregiudizio a questo arrecato, patisce un'offesa e perciò anche un danno non patrimoniale dal reato“

Cass., Sezione 3, U.P. 3.10.2007, Ferrucci

COMUNE PARTE CIVILE PER VIOLENZE SESSUALI

Cass., pen. sez. III, 15.10.2008 n. 38835

La sentenza ritiene ammissibile la costituzione di parte civile del Comune di Roma in un procedimento avente ad oggetto il reato di violenza sessuale.

Il riconoscimento della legittimazione attiva dell’ente territoriale in questa materia costituisce un inedito per i giudici di legittimità che fino a questa sentenza si erano pronunciati negativamente sul punto.

(cfr: Cass. Pen. sez. II, 4.02.1999, Siliberto; Cass. Pen. sez. III, 18.09.2001, Romano)

“ anche per la prevenzione e la repressione delle violazioni delle norme poste a tutela della libertà di determinazione della donna è configurabile in capo al Comune (che, rispetto al territorio in cui il fatto è commesso, ha una stabile relazione funzionale ed ha inserito tale tutela tra i propri scopi, primari e autonomi) la titolarità di un diritto soggettivo e di un danno risarcibile, individuabile in ogni lesione del diritto stesso, sicchè esso è legittimato alla costituzione di parte civile per il risarcimento dei danni morali e materiali relativi all'offesa, diretta e immediata, dello scopo sociale.”

Fondamento del danno non patrimoniale dell’ente pubblico

Il fondamento del danno per l’ente pubblico risiede nell’offesa dell’interesse protetto, qui da intendersi nel contrasto alla violenza di genere come mezzo per la promozione delle pari opportunità e per la rimozione di ogni forma di discriminazione basata sul genere o sull’orientamento sessuale sul proprio territorio.

Il perseguimento di tale obbiettivo rappresenta una specifica obbligazione istituzionale, che trova fondamento:
- Negli art. 3 e 117 Cost;
- Nella CEDAW, che deve essere attuata a ogni livello istituzionale
- Nella adesione alla carta europea per l’uguaglianza e la parità di
donne e uomini nella vita locale
- Nelle previsioni statutarie
- Nell’attuazione di piani (nazionali e locali) di azione di contrasto alla
discriminazione e alla violenza di genere

Nel caso del Comune di Roma, la Cassazione ha verificato

1) la previsione statutaria di impegno per le pari opportunità

“(… ) Nella specie, tra gli scopi primari e autonomi del Comune di Roma rientra, secondo lo Statuto adottato la promozione dello sviluppo economico, sociale e culturale della comunità locale con particolare riferimento alla condizione giovanile e femminile (art. 2 co. 5).

Il Comune, inoltre, si è proposto di garantire le pari opportunità per le donne... di curare il perseguimento dell'obiettivo adottando un codice di comportamento che assicuri un clima di pieno e sostanziale rispetto reciproco tra uomini e donne, con particolare attenzione all'eliminazione delle situazioni di molestie sessuali (art. 4 co. 2, e).”

2) l’attuazione in concreto di politiche di contrasto alla violenza di genere

“(…) Per l'attuazione della previsione statutaria è stato costituito, come accertato in sede di merito, un apposito ufficio dipartimentale con l'assunzione d'iniziative concrete tendenti a perseguire l'obiettivo di contrastare fenomeni d'aggressione alla realtà femminile e sono state investite risorse economiche per fare affermare una cultura femminile autonoma con l'affidamento di un immobile a un consorzio di associazioni femminili e con l'istituzione di un centro comunale di accoglienza per donne vittime di violenza. “

Verificata la sussistenza di tali requisiti ha sancito che:

1) il Comune è legittimato ad agire

“ In tal modo, il Comune ha normativamente trasformato interessi generici e diffusi dei cittadini rappresentati in propri interessi specifici e in oggetto peculiare delle proprie attribuzioni e dei suoi compiti istituzionali, donde la configurabilità in capo ad esso di un interesse concreto alla salvaguardia di una situazione storicamente circostanziata divenuta suo scopo primario ed elemento costitutivo. “

2) Gli abusi sessuali ledono l’interesse della collettività ad una società non sessista

“QUINDI, GLI ABUSI SESSUALI LEDONO NON SOLO LA LIBERTÀ MORALE E FISICA DELLA DONNA, MA ANCHE IL CONCRETO INTERESSE DEL COMUNE DI PRESERVARE IL TERRITORIO DA TALI DETERIORI FENOMENI AVENDO LO STESSO POSTO LA TUTELA DI QUEL BENE GIURIDICO COME PROPRIO OBIETTIVO PRIMARIO.”

CASS. PEN. SEZ. III SENTENZA 15.10.2008 N. 38835

Da ciò, secondo la Cassazione, discende un diritto del Comune sia al risarcimento del danno patrimoniale sia del danno non patrimoniale:

“Dalla frustrazione delle finalità e degli scopi dell'ente può conseguire un danno economico diretto per le diminuzioni patrimoniali eventualmente subite dagli organi comunali predisposti per alleviare i traumi delle vittime di abusi sessuali, sicchè, dovendosi ritenere il Comune ente esponenziale del suddetto interesse, lo stesso è legittimato, come tale, a costituirsi parte civile nel processo penale, ai sensi dell'art. 185 c.p. e art. 74 c.p.p..”

“Inoltre, è configurabile in capo al Comune un danno morale per la lesione dell'interesse perseguito di garantire la libertà di autodeterminazione della donna e la pacifica convivenza nell'ambito comunale, beni sociali statutariamente individuati come oggetto specifico di tutela.”