Will Salvadoran authorities listen to Beatriz’s plea and take action to save her life in accordance with her wishes and at the advice of the medical professionals caring for her?

Today the Supreme Court will reportedly hear testimony from Beatriz, her attorneys and her doctors, but we don’t know what the outcome of the court proceedings will be. The months of delays imposed by both President Funes and now the Supreme Court, have in fact raised questions about the extent to which they have the capacity to protect and uphold human rights and their own reputations are now on the line.

As my colleague points out, it really is inexcusable for the Salvadoran authorities to deny life-saving treatment to Beatriz, and each official must remember that they have individual responsibility—and potential culpability—for their part in the pain and suffering their utter failure to act is causing.

Until this week, there had been no real indication that the Salvadoran authorities were paying attention to the fact that this young woman’s life is deteriorating before all of our eyes. A few days ago, suggesting perhaps a glimmer of hope for Beatriz, President Funes in comments to the Salvadoran press said … [Beatriz] ”she has the right to decide over her life.”

Keep in mind, this statement was made after the United Nations, Inter-American Commission of Human Rights and El Salvador’s own Health Minister all called on the Salvadoran authorities to immediately authorize an abortion to save Beatriz’s life.

The question remains: what steps will President Funes, Attorney General Martinez, the Supreme Court and other Salvadoran officials take to ensure Beatriz is granted the life-saving medical treatment she needs?

.@presidencia_sv#Beatriz wants to live, you are responsible for guaranteeing her human rights #saveBeatriz and act now!

— AmnestyInternational (@amnesty) May 15, 2013

 

We will continue to post updates about this case on our blog as we digitally stand in solidarity with Beatriz in El Salvador. In the meantime, we urge you to join the conversation to #SaveBeatriz on Twitter and please take action on her behalf.

Women’s human rights activists gather in El Salvador to demand Beatriz is granted the life-saving treatment she needs (Photo Credit: Amnesty International).

By Kathryn Striffolino, Crisis Prevention and Response Advocate. Follow her on Twitter @katiestriff.

As you’re reading this, the Salvadoran authorities are STILL biding their time discussing the merits of Beatriz’s case, the young mother we posted about earlier this month. While she’s in the hospital experiencing early stage kidney failure, the authorities are holding the key to her life that is quickly fading.

We’ve promised updates on this case. Unfortunately, we know that Beatriz has been subjected to another week of cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment, and have no news regarding action by the authorities to save her life – in accordance with her wishes, and the recommendation of the health professionals responsible for her care.

Imagine you are in a hospital. You have lupus and you are experiencing kidney complications as a result. You have a one-year old son at home who was delivered by cesarean section weeks early because of pregnancy-related health complications. You’re pregnant again, and have been diagnosed as high-risk.

You found out after three sonograms your fetus is anencephalic, meaning that a portion of the fetus’s brain - consisting mainly of the cerebral hemispheres including the neo-cortex - doesn’t exist. With very few exceptions, fetuses with anencephaly do not make it to term and none survive infancy.

Your doctors recommend a therapeutic abortion as medical treatment in order for your chances of survival to greatly increase.

Except if you acquire an abortion, not only would you face criminal penalties of up to 30 years in jail, so would the medical professionals administering the treatment you need.

Sounds like a nightmare, right? For one Salvadoran woman, it’s reality.

This is what Beatriz is experiencing right now and her life is in the hands of the Salvadoran authorities. Currently in El Salvador, abortion under all circumstances is criminalized. Beatriz, through the health professionals responsible for her care, has been waiting for permission to proceed with the recommended treatment since the end of March when she submitted a request to the Salvadoran authorities for a therapeutic abortion – deemed necessary to safeguard her health and life. They also asked for a guarantee that the doctors treating her would not be prosecuted under the country’s strict laws. When the authorities failed to respond, Beatriz’s lawyers took the request to the country’s Supreme Court, and the Court has still not issued a decision authorizing the treatment she needs to survive.

This is what the Salvadoran authorities need to think about when they continue to jeopardize the life of this woman for yet another day, dragging their feet debating the merits of her case. She may not have many days left if the authorities do not move quickly to allow her doctors to provide the treatment they determined is necessary.

Keep in mind that Salvadoran authorities are biding their time despite precautionary measures issued by the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, the United Nations representative in El Salvador and the UN experts on the right to health; torture; and violence and discrimination against women amongst other international experts urging the authorities to grant Beatriz the therapeutic abortion she needs. This is also despite El Salvador’s own Minister of Health as well as her legal advisor writing to the Supreme Court of El Salvador corroborating the medical claims of Beatriz’s case. This is in spite of El Salvador’s international human rights obligations to ensure Beatriz’s sexual and reproductive rights.

For so many reasons, the Salvadoran authorities must act to #SaveBeatriz. It’s appalling that we live in a world today where cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment such as what’s happening to Beatriz is tolerated.

There’s still time for the Salvadoran authorities to act and save Beatriz’s life, but that window of opportunity is swiftly closing.

Join Amnesty International and so many others to call on the Salvadoran authorities to immediately grant Beatriz the therapeutic abortion she so desperately needs to survive, without the threat, risk or fear of criminal prosecution. Check our blog regularly for updates on the case.

Women’s human rights activists gather in El Salvador to demand Beatriz is granted the life-saving treatment she needs (Photo Credit: Amnesty International).

By Kathryn Striffolino, Crisis Prevention and Response Advocate. Follow her on Twitter @katiestriff.

Beatriz’s life is literally in the hands of the Salvadoran government. Demand that they immediately grant her the life-saving medical treatment she needs - before it’s too late.

About Beatriz’s Case

As you may have read recently on this blog, Beatriz from El Salvador is 4.5 months pregnant and suffers from lupus and other medical conditions, including kidney disease related to lupus. She also suffered serious complications during her previous pregnancy, resulting in her being deemed at high-risk of maternal mortality should this pregnancy progress. Three scans of her fetus have confirmed it is anencephalic (lacking a large part of the brain and skull). Almost all babies with anencephaly die before birth or within a few hours or days after.

Beatriz wants to live, and at the advice of medical professionals, has requested a therapeutic abortion through her doctors. Because abortion under all circumstances is criminalized in El Salvador, she has had to file a request with the Supreme Court to obtain permission for such treatment. Her request has been with the Supreme Court since it was admitted on April 17. The Supreme Court over the weekend ordered psychological and physical evaluations of Beatriz, suggesting she may not be mentally stable enough to request a therapeutic abortion – despite the fact that the El Salvadorian Minister of Health has publicly affirmed that Beatriz may die should she continue with her pregnancy, and that the fetus she is carrying is not viable.

The Health Ministry’s legal advisor also explicitly urged the court to resolve the case quickly before her condition worsens and called on the Salvadorian legislature to revisit the law criminalizing abortion under all circumstances.

The Inter-American Commission of Human Rights has recently gotten involved, requesting on April 23 the El Salvadorian government provide information within 72 hours on Beatriz’s case.

But the Salvadoran authorities are dragging their feet, and every day they debate the merits of Beatriz’s case, she’s suffering cruel and inhuman treatment. This physical suffering is further compounded by the emotional stress of not knowing whether she will live to see her one-year old son grow up. The continued denial of access to the medical treatment that she needs to survive is in violation of El Salvador’s international human rights obligations and access must be immediately granted.

Women’s sexual and reproductive rights are under siege in the Americas

Sexual and reproductive rights are grounded in human rights that are recognized in international human rights treaties, regional standards, national constitutions and other relevant human rights standards. The realization of sexual and reproductive rights requires respect for rights relating to physical and mental integrity, including the rights to life, to liberty and security of person; to freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; to privacy and respect for family life as well as rights related to freedom of conscience and expression, and freedom from discrimination.

Violations of the sexual and reproductive rights of women and girls are still common throughout the Americas. Unsafe abortions and limited access to contraception service to information about sexual and reproductive health are affecting a number of women and girls. In addition to El Salvador, Chile and Nicaragua ban abortion under all circumstances.

This means that even in cases of rape, incest, or when the mother’s health or life is in danger, any woman attempting to obtain an abortion – as well as the individuals assisting her in obtaining one – are subject to lengthy jail time and other criminal penalties. This total abortion ban is in contradiction international human rights standards.

Your actions could help save Beatriz’s life

There’s still time to save Beatriz’s life and for the Salvadoran authorities to comply with their international human rights obligations. You can help by taking action right here to call on the government of El Salvador to grant Beatriz the life-saving medical treatment she so desperately needs.

We will continue to post updates on the case, so please take action, stay tuned and share this information out widely.

This post is also available in Spanish.

Click to explore some emblematic human rights cases throughout the Americas, many of which have been positively influenced by the Inter-American System. These were taken from Amnesty International’s report “Transforming Pain into Hope: Human Rights Defenders in the Americas” (Photo Credit: Katie Striffolino via ArcGIS).

By Kathryn Striffolino, Crisis Prevention & Response Advocate. You can follow her on Twitter @katiestriff

This Friday, a Special Organization of American States (OAS) General Assembly will meet in Washington, D.C. to consider and adopt a draft resolution regarding strengthening the work of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). While not many would argue the IACHR is perfect, its integrity and core principles are under attack at the very moment the system is needed most by so many throughout our hemisphere.

On September 22, 2012, Honduran human rights lawyer Antonio Trejo Cabrera was killed. Gunmen shot him five times outside a wedding ceremony in a southern suburb of the capital, Tegucigalpa. Antonio Trejo Cabrera had reported receiving death threats linked to his work representing the victims of human rights abuses amidst the ongoing land conflict in the Bajo Aguán region of Honduras. Antonio Trejo Cabrera had been a lawyer for three peasant cooperatives embroiled in the complex land-rights dispute in Bajo Aguán. He had helped campesino communities to regain legal rights to land in the valley and was due to travel to Washington, D.C. in October 2012 to take part in hearings at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

What is the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights?

The IACHR was created collectively by states in 1959 and is comprised of experts who act in their personal capacity yet are nominated and elected by states. It draws power and clout primarily because of its expertise, impartiality and autonomy. According to many human rights defenders, victims of abuse, and their families whom I have met throughout the Americas, this body serves a vital role in securing justice and accountability throughout our own hemisphere, stepping in when states are unable or unwilling to do so. And justice and accountability is exactly why Antonio turned to the IACHR; however, he was unable to take part in hearings because he was shot and killed.

Explore for yourself!

You can explore more human rights cases - such as Antonio Trejo Cabrera’s - that Amnesty has documented over the past few years in the embedded interactive map. This provides just a snapshot of the countless human rights defenders throughout the Americas, many of whom have turned to the Inter-American Commission for the promotion, defense and protection of their or other people’s human rights. And it is these people, and so many others, who states participating in the OAS Special Session must remember tomorrow: these people are why you are there.

These defenders, and the activists and people they work tirelessly on behalf of, are one of the primary reasons why Amnesty International has welcomed the opportunity to provide input on the reform process to the Commission as a member of civil society, with the goal of strengthening the Inter-American System of Human Rights.

But the Inter-American Commission is currently under attack.

Over the past two years, however, the Inter-American Commission has suffered relentless attacks from states who, in part, resent the independent monitoring function of the IACHR – which, like other human rights watchdogs – exposes repression, injustice and demands accountability. Perhaps ironically, some of the states speaking out against the Commission have restricted freedom of expression in their own countries and, for example, are attempting to eliminate funding for the position of Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression.

These attacks are affecting the normal functioning of the IACHR and have the potential to affect the enjoyment of human rights by every single person in our hemisphere. These attacks must cease immediately.

This past Tuesday, after an extensive two year consultation with States, civil society, academics, victims, and their families, the IACHR approved reforms to its Rules of Procedures, Policies and Practices which, if effectively implemented, would strengthen the Commission while maintaining its autonomy and impartiality. These reforms are what should be taken note of and welcomed on Friday by Member-States of the OAS.

Will states stand up for human rights tomorrow?

Tomorrow, during the Forty-Fourth Special Session of the General Assembly of the OAS, states have an opportunity to reflect upon the collective human rights impact the IACHR has had over the past five decades, and take the following three actions which would strengthen, not destroy, the Inter-American System:

• Collectively refuse to allow political agendas to cloud the discourse and prioritize actual human rights protection by taking note and welcoming the reforms the IACHR approved on Tuesday, thus ending this challenging reform process which has drawn vital resources away from the Commission during the reform period;
• Reaffirm the independence and autonomy of the IACHR; and
• Commit to fully funding the IACHR so it may properly implement the approved reforms to its rules, policies and practices and to fully implement the decisions of the IACHR and the judgments of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Amnesty International will be observing the OAS Special Session on Friday, along with many other civil society partners, and in solidarity with people across the Americas – such as Antonio Trejo - who rely on the Inter-American System for their human rights protection.

And we have one message for all states participating in the OAS special session: please strengthen, don’t destroy, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

One of the recurrent challenges associated with utilizing social media outlets to report and monitor a situation during a period of time when ground events may or may not be rapidly developing (such as in Kenya): the situation is often times much more complex than 140 characters can convey, and the incorrect use of just a few words, could easily become an overflow of ingredients to an already bubbling human rights situation (Photo Credit: Till Muellenmeister/AFP/Getty Images)

By Kathryn Striffolino, Crisis Prevention and Response Advocate. You can follow her on Twitter @katiestriff.

Like many others, I have been closely watching the Kenyan elections. In fact, these elections may be the most “watched” elections ever. I am not necessarily talking about observers on the ground. Digital tools, including social media outlets, have greatly enhanced remote monitoring capability, and have emerged as a major component in the Kenyan elections.

The development of these tools and the use of online networks to filter and aggregate the interweb “buzz” have had a profound effect; for human rights monitors, these tools have become integral to the ability to monitor a situation remotely.

Coupled with seemingly endless possibilities, there are invariable challenges associated with the use of these tools. On one end of the spectrum, there are challenges associated with using social media to report on fragile and complex situations when the reporter may be forced to prioritize either speed or due diligence. On the other end, there challenges associated with being the monitor – including distilling fact from fiction.

And these challenges, if not effectively tackled, could incite much worse than the wide-spread mockery generated by two tweets from a France 24 journalist.

The tweets, the investigation and the method

As part of the function of human rights watchdogs, we monitor the digital space for credible information to assist us in our early warning and documentation efforts. For example, when we come across an indication of violence or unrest, we investigate and attempt to corroborate information: which is what I did last week when I came across the following tweets from a France 24 journalist reporting an alleged situation involving “gunshots” and “dramatic images… huge crowds fall[ing] over each other to vote.”

BREAKING Gun shots fired in #Nairobi#Kenya as huge crowds fall over each other to vote. Dramatic pictures on @france24_en in 15 min

— Stuart Norval (@stuartf24) March 4, 2013

 

Here’s those dramatic images from #Kenya as voting begins in #Nairobi amid security fears f24.my/Y8eycq via @france24

— Stuart Norval (@stuartf24) March 4, 2013

I wanted to see if I could corroborate the incident, and what, if any, additional information could be found related to it, which would help me better understand what was actually happening. In addition to searching Twitter and YouTube, I used a few of the platforms and tools increasingly becoming important for helping to establish the validity of information coming through social media channels: Ushahidi (Kenyan elections deployment being Uchaguzi), an open source reporting platform whose creation stemmed from the ’07-’08 Kenyan; Geofeedia (search by location social media aggregator); Storyful (social media newsgathering and content validation); and Amani Kenya @108 (public reporting platform administered by the Kenyan government with the monetary assistance of UNDP-Kenya).

I was able to find, after about an hour of searching, multiple reports about long lines at the polls and delays in select openings, peaceful police presence at polling stations and a polling center gate “yet to be opened.” I also came across lots of (primarily) good-natured criticism of the tweets, plenty of which came from Kenyans, accusing the foreign media outlet of misrepresenting the situation in Kenya by reporting so dramatically about one seemingly isolated event related to unrest.

Armed w/ MACHETE & spoons, Kenyan man destroys a plate of rice! Cc @stuartf24#PicturesForStuarttwitter.com/rimbui/status/…

— rimbui (@rimbui) March 4, 2013

Jokes aside, what I was not able to find was sufficient enough information of “gunshots” and “huge crowds falling over each other to vote” within the parameters of my search that I felt adequate enough to corroborate the France 24 journalist’s incident report, as it appeared.

The Power of “The Crowd”

In the end, I could only say that there was a “report” of gunshots and a group of individuals appear to have broken through a gate. In that way, I can understand the process that has led to reporting on the Kenyan elections in a manner which has incited mockery.

I also remain wary of the risk of incitement as near instantaneous communications spread to more locales around the world, many with poor human rights histories.

This exercise highlights one of the recurrent challenges associated with utilizing social media outlets to report and monitor a situation during a period of time when ground events may or may not be rapidly developing (such as in Kenya): the situation is often times much more complex than 140 characters can convey, and the incorrect use of just a few words, could easily become an overflow of ingredients to an already bubbling human rights situation.

On the other hand, this report, and the quick investigation into it,highlights the immense value of trained and equipped citizen reporters;and also, the importance of listening to the people who are oftentimes the closest to the ground which certainly helps monitors filter and understand the digital noise. “The crowd” helped put the France 24 reporter’s tweets into context by identifying the misrepresentations the text conveyed and pointing out (in part by lack of reporting), this was apparently an isolated incident which did not appear to have escalated.

So we can’t forget about the possibilities here. Materializing not only because of new technological tools, but a growing movement of citizen reporters, many of whom have already done incredible work and are receiving formal trainings in areas such as utilizing social media, video and other digital tools for their human rights work. Just imagine how many more eyes are now witnessing (and reporting about) any given event, at any given time. And this, from the perspective of a human rights monitor, is one of the most powerful tools in the making.

The ICC has announced it will open an investigation into crimes under international law committed in the year-long Mali conflict.© ISSOUF SANOGO/AFP/GettyImages

By Kathryn Striffolino, Advocate and Science for Human Rights Project Coordinator at Amnesty International USA

Mali is currently facing its most serious humanitarian and human rights crisis since its independence in 1960, with myriad rights abuses rampant, amounting to what may become charges of war crimes and/or crimes against humanity. Cue the International Criminal Court (ICC).

“The legal requirements have been met, we will investigate.”-ICC Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda

Yesterday, the Chief Prosecutor of the ICC, Fatou Bensouda, announced the Court is officially opening an investigation into the situation in Mali. As you may know, the Malian authorities self-referred the situation to the Chief Prosecutor back in July of 2012. The investigation will certainly take some time, but this step represents hope for all those who believe that the most serious crimes under international law are of concern to all; therefore, all states must join together to investigate the crimes and bring those responsible to justice.

Amnesty welcomed the announcement about the investigation—as we’ve been urging the ICC to look into the situation in Mali since July—and we are urging the Court to fully investigate crimes committed by all parties across the full geography of the country.

But what does this announcement really mean? Here are three important things to know about the ICC and Mali.

1. No one is above (or outside of) the law

Armed Islamist groups, other armed opposition groups, self-defence militias, the Malian military and other state security agents, the French Armed Forces, any other party to the hostilities… no one should be exempt from the Court’s investigation if they are credibly accused of crimes under the Court’s jurisdiction. And all eyes are now on Mali, so perpetrators (and would-be perpetrators) take note: all actors participating in hostilities MUST adhere to their obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law.

The Rome Statute, which established the ICC and provides the framework within which the court operates, details the crimes the court has jurisdiction over, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression (subject to certain conditions being met which are not applicable to the current situation in Mali).

Finally, the court has jurisdiction over ALL of Mali, not just the north or the south of the country. Despite the focus of the investigation (as announced by the Chief Prosecutor) being on the three northern regions of Mali, it remains vital the Court investigates incidents which have occurred in the south of the country such as the torture, disappearances and extrajudicial execution of soldiers held in detention facilities by the military junta in areas such as Bamako and Kati military camp.

2. The ICC can help, but it alone cannot “fix” Mali

It’s going to take a concerted international, regional and domestic effort to improve the situation in Mali, which is very complex, as my colleague Scott detailed here.  Despite many warnings of a mounting human rights and humanitarian catastrophe, the situation was allowed to deteriorate, and there is now no simple solution to mitigate suffering.

There are far too many individuals with blood on their hands at this point, some which have found their way (or have remained) in the state’s security apparatus, for the ICC to prosecute.

But the ICC was never intended to replace or absolve a state’s responsibility to investigate and prosecute abuses committed on its soil or by its nationals. Instead, it is to serve as a safety net and, through its investigations and prosecution of those most responsible, to spur and support domestic courts to fairly carry out their own prosecutions.  Therefore, the international community must ensure that Malian authorities investigate and prosecute—in accordance with internationally recognized standards of fair trials—any crimes committed by any armed personnel in Mali. This means providing resources and support to the Malian authorities to be able to do this themselves or with the assistance of regional and or international partners should they request it.

Right now, it is vital for the international community to do its part to ensure impunity does not prevail. An immediate first step, in addition to supporting the investigation by the ICC, is to deploy human rights monitors with the resources to be able to do their job. This will aid in current documentation and future accountability efforts and is vital to the protection and preservation of human rights—especially for those who are most affected by this conflict. The ICC will only be looking into the crimes within its jurisdiction, and it is vital not to neglect the spectrum of the human rights abuses that have, or may soon, be committed.

3. The opening of this investigation by the ICC into Mali is another milestone for international justice

For valid reasons, the ICC and other international justice mechanisms have sometimes been criticized for being too slow. In the case of Mali, the ICC acted expeditiously by announcing the opening of an investigation within six months of receiving the self-referral from the Malian authorities. This demonstrates that the Court can help to deter crimes – and possibly help end conflict – in real time, and not only through post-conflict investigation and prosecution.

Promising news in the midst of the conflict is what I’m calling it, and it’s a staunch reminder to perpetrators of rights abuses in Mali right now: your actions will not go unnoticed and you will be held accountable for them. So let’s all join together and demand justice.

Syrian women demonstrate against President Bashar al-Assad's regime KHALIL MAZRAAWI/AFP/Getty Images

First, the welcome news: a new tool was launched last week by the Women’s Media Center’s project, Women Under Siege, to track sexual violence committed against women in Syria. Using Ushahidi technology, this project uses crowdsourcing to collect and map evidence of sexual violence, in real time or as close to real time as the “crowd” would like. Survivors, witnesses, and first-responders can submit reports via email, Twitter (using #RapeinSyria) or directly via the site.

Collecting this type of data is vital toward ensuring accountability for human rights crimes related to sexual violence, especially in conflict settings where human rights monitors may be unable to gain access. By highlighting the issue to the public and policy-makers, by empowering women and girls with a tool to share their stories, and by compiling reports of crimes related to sexual violence which are incredibly under-reported as it is, new technological tools allow us to see through the fog of war and send a strong message to perpetrators of violence—your crimes will not go unnoticed.

#Eyesonsyria

We have been utilizing new tools and techniques such as crowdsourcing, remote-sensing and interactive mapping for quite some time now. Last year, we launched the interactive Eyes on Syria platform. By mapping user-submitted solidarity messages and activism stories, as well as visualizing human rights abuses, Amnesty has been able to publicly highlight the atrocities being committed in Syria. As a grassroots human rights movement, nothing would be complete without a means for taking action—so integrated into the map are action outlets where folks can click to take action.

The deployment of these new tools and technologies by the international community for human rights monitoring, research, advocacy and direct service provision have filled an integral niche in our work, including the rapid saturation of social media outlets such as Twitter and Facebook into our daily lives. Social media, in the same vein as the deployment of new technological tools, can be used to convey information across time zones and political boundaries, and serve as a means of community empowerment. Personally, I use social media apps to stay in touch with friends near and far, to share and read interesting or thought-provoking articles, and more increasingly, to help track the news.

With the advent of anything new, however, new risk is inherently generated as well.

Stalking women in the United States

So a bit of scary news: this past weekend, while I was skimming Facebook from my smart phone, I came across an article a friend had posted…. which scared me. As a woman, it scared me. As someone who uses social media and understands the somewhat limitless applications of technology, it scared me. After reading more, I became even more scared, and quadruple checked my privacy settings on all of my social media apps and then considered deleting all of my accounts because if this was happening now, who knows what could happen in the future. Why was I so freaked out? Because I learned about the “Girls Around Me” app (developed by Russian development company i-Free), which collects location data from Foursquare, shows local bars and restaurants where women had “checked in” and matches that info with their public Facebook profile–including photos and dating status.

The end result was that the user could essentially see how many women were in a particular location based off publically available information provided by social media, what they looked like, and what their names were. According to a comprehensive article published in the Atlantic, the “branding was crass… but, as the developers of the app argued, they had technically done nothing wrong aside from being piggish and crude.”

Thankfully, there was such a public outcry after this app hit the public domain that Facebook and Foursquare have blocked the app’s use of its APIs, claiming it violated its privacy policies. This forced the developer to pull Girls Around Me from the app store. Perhaps they saved some lives by doing so.

The Atlantic further suggests that “if violations like this continue, respecting the context in which data’s given might not just be a good privacy practice, it might become a good business practice.” And I couldn’t agree more.

So please think about things for a moment

Technology can do so much good—for women and men around the world—but we must respect the context in which information is presented as well as the intent of the presentation of such information. The fight for accountability for sexual violence committed against women in Syria will absolutely be enhanced by the mapping platform put out by the Women Under Siege’s project. Human rights in Syria will absolutely be better protected due to the Eyes on Syria platform. Don’t get me wrong–I am a huge supporter of these types of initiatives and encourage folks around the world to think about how they may enhance their goals.

It’s when I read about the scary things that people do with technology such as the company that put out the “Girls Around Me” app…that make me take a second to think about things, and I encourage you to do the same.

What information am I putting out there about myself that could put me at risk? What information are my friends putting out there about themselves that could put them at risk? And finally, how can we encourage all to respect the context in which we put out and use personal information? Because, well, it’s the appropriate thing to do—and at Amnesty we believe that first, you do no harm.

Follow me on Twitter @katiestriff

Jean-Claude Duvalier lunches in Port-au-Prince (Photo Hector Retamal/AFP/Getty Images)

When I was in Haiti with Amnesty in December, training local activists in using new technology for human rights, I had the opportunity to meet many local defenders and activists.

We spoke openly about the prevalence of sexual and gender-based violence in Haiti and the impunity the perpetrators of those crimes enjoy.  We also spoke about the right to housing and the illegal forced evictions the Haitian government was conducting in displacement camps.

The one topic we didn’t discuss out rightly (for good reasons) was that Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier had recently returned to Haiti, that he still has a network of supporters, and that he has not been held accountable for his alleged crimes — including torture, disappearances, and killings — committed during his 15 year reign.  Crimes for which it not appears he will not be held to account for.

Duvalier had been under investigation by Haitian authorities since January 2011 when he returned to the country after enjoying a safe haven in France for 25 years. Haitian judicial authorities, however, just announced they are dropping the case and that Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier will not stand trial for alleged crimes against humanity. Rather, he will face accountability for embezzlement of public funds.

I do not know if you watch Saturday Night Live Weekend Update, but if you do (even if you don’t) this situation prompts me to also state: “Really?!?!”

The Duvalier regime is widely known for stifling any sort of opposition by using any and all means necessary and trouncing on international human rights norms.  Obviously the investigating judge did not read the documented evidence (or if he did, he certainly didn’t consider it), which includes the testimonies of many survivors and their families, including that of Raymond Davius, a member of the Haitian armed forces in the 1980s. Mr. Davius was subjected to ill-treatment 17 times while detained in the prisons of Jean Claude Duvalier’s regime. He was thrown into detention solely for sympathizing with the opposition party. Mr. Davius filed a complaint but the investigating judge did not question him, or even consider his case.

Bullying a human rights watchdog won’t improve one’s image

The investigating judge’s decision, in my opinion, is absurd. Why? Because once you consider the evidence gathered and submitted by human rights groups to inform the investigation, including evidence gathered by Amnesty International, I challenge you to disagree with me.  Amnesty International alone submitted over 100 documents of evidence to prosecutors.

Further, in September, some of my colleagues, while in Haiti releasing the evidence gathered by Amnesty International, were stormed by Duvalier supporters at a press conference for the sole purpose of disrupting the launch of the report. After four courageous attempts at opening a dialogue, my colleagues were finally able to deliver Amnesty’s message to the journalists who remained, alongside Mr. Davius who shared his story. Other survivors and families had also been invited to the press conference to have their voices heard; however, sadly most of those who attended had to withdraw as they felt intimidated by the presence of the protesters.

Javier Zuniga, Special Adviser at Amnesty International who researched the crimes committed by Duvalier (and was at the press conference in September), has summed up the investigation well:

“The conclusion of the sham investigation into Duvalier is a disgrace and will further entrench impunity in Haiti. No serious effort was made to determine the truth despite the multiple complaints and abundant evidence about the crimes committed and the victims…this is a dark day for Haiti and for justice.”

The conclusion of the investigation is a sham indeed.

There is still hope for justice to be served

It is important to note; however, that the victims can appeal the judge’s decision and Amnesty International has vowed to continue supporting their search for justice. Under international law, torture, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial executions and arbitrary arrests are considered crimes against humanity when committed as part of a systematic or widespread attack against the civilian population. Further, no statute of limitations may apply to crimes against humanity and the alleged perpetrators cannot benefit from amnesties, even in the case of former heads of state.

This means that we all must continue to urge accountability for the alleged crimes against humanity committed during the rule of Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier. It is our duty to ensure the voices of the family members and survivors of Duvalier’s crimes are heard. No one, under international law, should ever be subjected to the ill-treatment, torture, extrajudicial executions, and arbitrary arrest, which Raymond Davius and countless others endured.

The dropping of this case by the Haitian judicial authorities sends a very dangerous message—that one can get away with crimes against humanity—as long as you commit them in Haiti.

The international community is watching, and I only hope the impunity Duvalier has enjoyed for the past few decades will soon cease to exist.

You can follow Kathryn Striffolino on Twitter @katiestriff

Mexican soldiers © Jesus Alcazar/AFP/Getty Images

A historic Mexican Supreme Court decision to ensure soldiers accused of human rights abuses against civilians be tried in civilian – not military – courts may bring Mexico closer to respecting human rights and fulfilling their Merida Initiative obligations.

In 2008, the Merida Initiative security assistance package was signed by then-US President George W. Bush. This unprecedented partnership between the United States and Mexico aims to fight organized crime and associated violence while respecting human rights.

To date, the US has allocated roughly $1.5 billion to Mexico through the Initiative and is currently debating another round of assistance.

Yet, there is a catch. The US Congress initially required 15% of select Merida funds be withheld until the State Department issues a report to Congress illustrating that Mexico was fully meeting four specific  human rights requirements.

Currently the Mexican government has not fully met these human rights requirements. However, the recent Mexican Supreme Court decision brings Mexico closer to fulfilling these obligations.

The Supreme Court ruling is an important step in the struggle to limit military jurisdiction as well as set a precedent with regard to the obligation to comply with judgements handed down by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) after the enforced disappearance of Rosendo Radilla Pacheco and the denial of due process and justice for him and his family.

Impunity for soldiers committing crimes against civilians is a big problem in Mexico.  In 2010, there were many reports of unlawful killings, enforced disappearances, torture and arbitrary detention by members of the military. The Mexican National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) registered 1,163 complaints of abuses by the military, and in November reported ongoing investigations into more than 100 complaints of unlawful killings by the armed forces in the 18 months to November 2010.

Over the past few months, Amnesty International has documented several additional cases of enforced disappearance with no follow-up investigation by either the military or civilian authorities.

Mexican President Felipe Calderón’s attempted to address the lack of justice for military abusers by proposing to modify the Mexican Military Code of Justice in October 2010.  However, his proposal was inadequate because it did not guarantee that all human rights violations would be excluded from a military court’s jurisdiction. It would only remove three violations from military jurisdiction—enforced disappearance, torture, and rape. All other human rights related crimes alleged to have been committed by the military (such as extrajudicial executions, arbitrary detentions, and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment) would still be investigated and prosecuted by military courts.

Additionally under President Calderon’s proposal the initial investigation for determining whether a crime has been committed would remain in the hands of the Military Attorney General’s office. As a result, the majority of alleged human rights violations committed by the Mexican military would remain in the military justice system if President Calderon’s proposal was passed as is.

While the Supreme Court’s decision should be applauded, additional steps are needed to respect, protect and guarantee human rights in Mexico. This must include complying with all requirements of the Merida Initiative including having the Attorney-General’s Office assume it’s responsibility to open and move forward with investigations into reports of violations committed by the armed forces.

Now is also the time for the US to carefully monitor Mexico’s efforts to reform the Military Code of Justice to fully support the Supreme Court’s decision, as well as monitor the fulfillment of the other three human rights requirements of the Merida Initiative that include: Improving transparency and accountability of federal police; enforcing the prohibition on the use of testimony obtained through torture; and establishing a mechanism for regular consultations with human rights and civil society organizations concerning implementation of the Merida Initiative.

While the Mexican government faces a challenging task of maintaining public security, the initiatives and policies they propose should always support the human rights of the Mexican people.

 “After they left I didn’t do anything….I don’t know where there is a clinic offering medical treatment for victims of violence.” 

Because she was blindfolded, Suzie didn’t go to the police because she didn’t know who the men were that raped her.  She told Amnesty International that the police patrol the streets, but she’s never seen them inside the camp.

In the Haitian camps there are many women and girls like Suzie. It is therefore vitally important that both the international community and the Haitian government take immediate action to treat the issue of violence against women as a priority for the humanitarian and reconstruction effort in Haiti.

Beyond causing catastrophic loss of life, structural and institutional damage, the January 2010 earthquake in Haiti exacerbated pre-existing abuses of economic and social rights , leaving some of the most vulnerable internally displaced populations – women and girls – at high risk for rape and sexual violence. Amnesty International’s most recent report on Haiti address the high prevalence of gender based violence in the camps and the dire need for the rights of women and girls to be at the forefront of any and all humanitarian and reconstruction efforts.

Currently, U.S. policy makers have a critical opportunity to support the women and girls in Haiti’s camps and elsewhere. The prevalence of sexual and gender-based violence in Haiti’s camps demonstrates the importance of President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request– specifically, the importance of the programs and policies that are supported by the International Affairs Budget.  At little over 1% of the entire U.S. Federal Budget, the various programs funded through the International Affairs Budget help to secure the United States’ diplomatic, security and economic interests abroad—including helping to alleviate the circumstances of extreme poverty that fuel conflict and exacerbate violence committed against women and girls.

It is essential that Congress fully funds the International Affairs budget in order to ensure that the dignity and safety of women and girls in Haiti and throughout the world are fully respected and their rights are fully protected.  

Join us this week, in honor of International Women’s Day and Women’s Week of Action, and take action now to urge Congress to fully fund the International Affairs Budget in order to better protect the rights of women and girls across the globe!