[TLDR (too long didn’t read): If you are reading this, chances are it behooves you.This Reader is about the many faces of injustice and what activists are called to do about it. For a quick overview, just read the bolded text]. Traducir/traduire los/les Readers; usar/utiliser deepl.com
International justice lacks independence (Patrice Lumumba)
1. Why? Because:
— International justice is never politically neutral; the central question is who defines its priorities and for whose benefit it operates.
–International law is imperial; it is too often oppressive and promotes the status-quo –when it is supposed to be liberatory and fair to all.
—Under corporate law, doing business is a privilege, not a right and until this is changed to align it with human rights (HR), nothing will change.
2. Can, in any way then, international law help? Less and less. It is its inconsistent application and its selective manipulation by powerful states that lead us to this perception of their irrelevance. In the new world disorder, international law is indeed bordering on the irrelevant. Current international law is not in step with new challenges. Most of all, the credibility of international law is threatened by power rivalries. That is the new reality as we transition from the rules-based order to the new ‘might makes right’ order.Lamenting or condemning the long-lasting irrelevance of international HR and other laws is thus not enough. (Mukesh Kapila, University of Manchester)
3. But wait! For the less saintly minded among us, the UN Charter offers us the International Court of Justice. Yes, but mutual goodwill (is there such an animal?) is still essential as the ICJ cannot enforce its rulings, and only 74 of 193 UN member states recognize ICJ jurisdiction.
4. Well, the institutional architecture of the International Court reflects an obsolete international order. Its management from Europe, its Western funding and its political dependence on influential powers create a structural imbalance that limits equality among states. This institutional design responds to a logic inherited from the post-Cold War world, characterized by Western hegemony.* In an increasingly multipolar international context, this configuration does not guarantee universal justice. What we reject is selective and neocolonial justice whose punitive rules apply mostly to those who lack power. The problem is not the-idea-of-an-international-criminal-justice, but the Court’s inability to apply it neutrally. The Court needs greater sensitivity to local contexts, to political dynamics and to indigenous forms of conflict resolution.
*: The moral and ethical principles that reject the dogma that ‘nothing can be achieved by force’ has not been shaken one iota from the social consciousness of the West by wars, including the two world wars –and this ipso-facto leads to UN resolutions (of the Security Council, for example) that do not represent a fair negotiation, but an imposition –which is unacceptable. (Luis M. Arce Isaac, Prensa Latina)
5. Creating better justice mechanisms (a ‘reparative justice’?) does not mean moving away from an ideal international justice, but rather moving towards a more truly universal and egalitarian justice system, where no region receives unequal treatment and no state is above the law. What needs to be done with international law is to democratize it. Because justice so often is the mask for the injustice of the powers-that-be (Politika), it is time to move towards a plural, legitimate, sovereign system of international justice, i.e., a truly universal justice. (Eduardo Mernies, Uruguay)
6. Happy disobedience and a prosperous resistance! (New year’s poster shared by Frederick Spielberg) …or if you prefer: Indignez-Vous! when facing injustice (Stephane Hessel)
–We/you are not here to share ‘points’, but rather to make a difference (no matter how small, ‘starting next Monday morning…’) in y/our respective spheres of influence in a manner where each of us will ‘dig deeper’. (Nils A. Kastberg, international child protection expert)
—An organized force can only be opposed by an organized force. There is no other way! (Albert Einstein)
—Sometimes insurrection is actually a resurrection. (Victor Hugo)
Indifference does not change and move people: being present and speaking-up does (Jean Luc Melenchon, former member of the European Parliament)
7. “In the North, you are not desperate enough to protest yet”, a Kenyan activist was heard saying recently. That may be true. Perhaps many people in the North refuse to internalize the extent of the political shifts, upheavals, HR violations and flagrant injustices around the world —in good part because they are exposed to ill-intentioned reactionary messages and forces that are flooding the internet with disinformation.** (F+D Magazine)
**: There are 70+ conservative radio talk shows in the US and only 4 or 5 liberal ones. (Michael Smerkonish, CNN)
8. In the form of a corollary: Precisely because injustice is the most notorious creator of opponents, critics, and social activists, HR activists need to graduate from being project technicians to being architects of systems and of movements that stay rooted in justice, HR, dignity and systemic change. (United Edge) Furthermore, activists cannot overlook the urgent need for political education –not forgetting the fact that there are illiterate populations that absolutely need to be reached. Add to this activists’ need to branch out to work, not only towards labor unions, but also towards progressive political parties, parliaments and governments.
Bottom line
9. As HR activists, we need to frame what we want rather than just what we oppose, i.e., shift toward solution-based efforts. This means we need to propose and act upon innovative, realistic solutions*** rather than mostly focusing on denouncing the many harms we observe. (Thomas Coombes, HR strategist and communications expert)
***: Yes, it is easy to meet, not so easy to act together. (I purport that this has been our weakness; the rich are more united; they close rank very rapidly). Despite the fact that many of our fellow citizens around the globe claim to be our friends, they actually are subservient and obey –and think little. (Hermann Hesse, Siddharta) So, never ignore the willingness of many other citizens around the globe, to act: Reach out! (The Guardian)
10. We are further faced with answering two keyquestions:
- How can we continue the fight despite the setbacks and increasing constraints our advocacy and concrete demands we face?
- What do we do after we face HR losses at scale?
11. Progress in HR is rarely, if ever,linear and losses are inevitable. When faced with a loss, it is okay, even helpful, to make space to feel despair before re-engaging with the work. As an East African activist told us after a devastating legal defeat: “Today we cry and tomorrow we fight; there are no failures except losses we do not learn from”.
12. By viewing setbacks as opportunities for strategic adaptation rather than permanent defeats, we must maintain our resilience and capacity to stay effective while tackling the struggles we have faced for decades —without losing sight of our long-term goals. By thinking intentionally about how we can respond to setbacks, we can start to chart strategies to stay in the game, work towards longer-term victories, and effect transformative change. (Gulika Reddy and Anjli Parrin)
Claudio Schuftan, Ho Chi Minh City
Your comments are welcome at schuftan@gmail.com
All Readers are available at www.claudioschuftan.com
Postscript/Marginalia
-Constant renewal does not mean forgetting the value and impact of old paths. When forging new paths, be aware that what unites (or separates) us today may be of no significance tomorrow. (Claudio Sepulveda)