FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
The Role of Youth, Women, Religious Groups, and Civil Society in Preventing Violent Extremism
Remarks
Robert Berschinski
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
Remarks as Delivered at Central and South Asia Regional Conference on Countering Violent Extremism
Astana, Kazakhstan
June 30, 2015
Let me begin by thanking the Government of Kazakhstan for hosting this important conference and for your hospitality last night, and also thanking my fellow panelists for sharing your time and insights.
I'd like to take as my point of departure a few of the points raised by the U.S. head of delegation, Customs and Border Patrol Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske, in his opening remarks yesterday.
Given that we've heard a lot of panelists since yesterday morning, I'll offer a brief recap. Commissioner Kerlikowske said five things I think are worth repeating:
First, that as a life-long professional law enforcement officer, his perspective is that "real security is not about arrests and detention," but about "the way governments interact with their societies."
Second, that as we seek to prevent violent extremism, it is in governments' best interest to empower non-governmental organizations and other citizens--youth, women, faith leaders, and victims among them.
Third, that violations of religious freedom are one important driver of radicalization.
Fourth, that respect for human rights is a law enforcement best practice.
And fifth and finally, that corruption undermines society's faith in its government, which produces the kinds of alienation that can drive individuals toward the forms of violent extremism that we collectively seek to end.
One additional theme I've heard running through all the panels thus far is that the drivers of radicalization are complex, and thus we need to be as holistic and inclusive as possible in our response. It's clear that government alone cannot successfully address the issue. Non-governmental, community-based, and religious voices are essential.
I'd like to offer a few thoughts on each of these lessons.
First, as we heard in yesterday's panel on the uses and abuses of new media, we are all grappling with extremists' misuse of the internet to spread their message. And while there are certainly times in which calls for direct imminent violence by terrorist groups and their sympathizers should be taken offline, we should remember that peaceful expression and the free exchange of ideas are an essential part of the antidote to the appeal of violent extremist ideologies.
When we suppress peaceful and legitimate expression and ideas, even ones with which we disagree or even find abhorrent, we simply drive extremist voices underground, where they are harder to track and challenge, while in many cases enabling conspiracy theories to thrive. So engagement, rather than censorship, needs to be part of the solution.
Efforts to clamp down on freedom of expression lead me to my next point, which is that notwithstanding the many things that we don't know about the process of radicalization, one thing we do know is that one of the key drivers of political violence is that it is in part rooted in experiences of injustice—such as discrimination, corruption, and abuses by government authorities or security forces that are perpetuated with impunity.
This conference's analogue in Kenya just wrapped up last week, and one of the data points noted during that conference was that 65% of Shabaab members interviewed by a think tank said they joined the group as a reaction to the aggressive and discriminatory actions of local security forces, as well as ethnic profiling, arbitrary detentions, and police corruption.
Now we need to take each instance of radicalization within a local context, but there is a generalizable point to be made that populations that have access to transparent and non-corrupt governance, the rule of law, and the fundamental freedoms of expression, religious belief, association, and assembly tend to have fewer grievances and more outlets for what grievances they do have, and are thus more resistant to the call of violent extremism.
With respect to religious groups, we know that government efforts to control peaceful religious belief or practice, especially for so-called “non-traditional” religious actors, generates grievances and in some cases alienates communities -- the opposite of what we should seek to achieve from the perspective of countering violent extremist narratives of oppression and subjugation.
More broadly, reducing the space for civil society to operate--a trend that is unfortunately spreading across this region and around the world in parallel to the growth of groups like Al Qaeda and Daesh--harms governmental CVE efforts, as civil society actors are often those closest to vulnerable populations.
This is particularly true not only of religious groups, but also of women and youth. That's why, through the Global Counterterrorism Forum and other means, we must continue to develop best practices on incorporating women's views into CVE efforts, and conduct more study on what motivates women and girls toward radicalism.
A range of contextual challenges, including legal and institutional restrictions, safety concerns, and lack of resources and skills, often prevent full and effective participation of women and girls in CVE policy-making and programs. But women and girls are leaders, problem-solvers, inspirers, and teachers, as well as mothers, sisters, wives, and providers -- their input and efforts are imperative to batting back violent extremism.
Let me say in closing that we in government cannot do it alone. More broadly, as UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said recently while touring this region, curbing freedoms creates “an illusion of stability in the short-run” but ultimately fosters “a breeding ground for extremist ideologies" in the longer run.
As Ban said, “Around the world, the way to confront threats is not more repression, it is more openness. More human rights. The road to a stable future is by strengthening the rule of law. By fighting corruption. By ensuring an independent judiciary. By guaranteeing free media. By building just societies. By empowering citizens."
The United States fully supports these words from the UN Secretary General. Operating space for youth, women, religious groups, and civil society must be safeguarded—so that these populations can speak their minds, organize among themselves, and bring their experiences to bear on creating more peaceful, tolerant, and democratic societies.
Thank you.
Showing posts with label CIVIL SOCIETY. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CIVIL SOCIETY. Show all posts
Thursday, July 2, 2015
Friday, February 20, 2015
SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS AT SUMMIT ON COUNTERING VIOLENT EXTREMISM
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Outlining an Action Agenda to Counter Violent Extremism
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism
Washington, DC
February 19, 2015
SECRETARY KERRY: So good morning, all. That video very briefly are some of the images of terror and much of the rationale for our being here today. Nobody wants the good to die young, and we all have an enormous obligation, enormous responsibility to find the ways to meet this scourge.
This is the ministerial component of these several days here in Washington, and I want to thank everybody. I know that the schedule of any minister in government today is enormously challenging. So for all of you to come here and spend this much time is really a reflection of the deep commitment and concern about the challenges that we face.
And at the White House yesterday, local practitioners and civil society leaders from around the world gathered to highlight the community-led efforts that can prevent terrorist recruitment and infiltration. There’s been a silly debate in the media in the last days about sort of what you have to do. You have to do everything. You have to take the people off the battlefield who are there today, but you’re kind of stupid if all you do is do that and you don’t prevent more people from going to the battlefield. So we have a broad challenge here. And mostly it is to talk about facts and realities and to take those realities and put them into a real strategy that we all implement together. No one country, no one army, no one group is going to be able to respond to this adequately. And we see that in the numbers of countries that are now being touched by it.
So our goal today is to build on the discussions of the last two days by looking at ways both to address the most alarming threats that we face, but also to get practical, to strengthen the role of civil society – in particular women, youth, and victims – and to ensure that civil society has the space to be able to operate. We need to identify and amplify credible voices, expanding religious and other education that promotes tolerance and peace and respect for all religions; we need to address the social, economic, and political marginalization that is part of this challenge.
When I was recently in a country in northern Africa, the foreign minister there over a good dinner told me about the challenge of a certain portion of their population where young people are just proselytized and captured at a very young stage, paid money in some cases. And once their minds are full of this invective and this distortion, they don’t need to pay them anymore. But what was chilling was, this foreign minister said to me, they don’t have a five-year strategy; they have a 35-year strategy. And so we have to come together and say, “What’s our strategy? How are we going to respond?”;
Our goal today is to take this chance to think broadly about how to prevent violent ideologies from taking hold, and how to prevent terrorist networks such as ISIL or Boko Haram or any group of other names from linking up with aggrieved groups elsewhere, and how to prevent them from thereby expanding their influence.
This morning, I expect that the secretary-general and President Obama will urge us to push ahead as far and as fast as we can to work on the – to develop the work streams that we have already identified. And some of our efforts are going to take place in public gatherings such as this. But I think everybody here understands that much of this work is going to be done quietly, without fanfare, in classrooms, in community centers, in workplaces, in houses of worship, on urban street corners, and in village markets. In the months to come, we will have regional summits, and I’m sure we’ll have other events, which will gauge the progress and measure the next steps. And in New York this fall, our leaders will come together as a group. But between now and then, we must all contribute, and our collaboration and our cooperation must be constant.
Now, we need to remember that our adversaries don’t have to cope with distractions. They don’t have a broad set of responsibilities to fulfill. They don’t have the same institutional responsibilities that we do to meet the needs of our citizens. Terror is their obsession. It’s what they do. And if we let them, their singleness of purpose could actually wind up giving them a comparative advantage. But with the images of recent outbreaks fresh in our minds, everybody here knows we simply can’t let that happen. We have to match their commitment and we have to leave them with no advantage at all.
And this morning, we will begin with a session devoted to a single word: why. Why do people make what to many of us would seem to be an utterly wrongheaded choice and become the kind of terrorists that we’re seeing? It’s a question that we need to approach with humility, but also with determination, because you cannot defeat what you don’t understand. Certainly, there is no single answer.
In our era, poisonous ideas can come from almost anywhere – from parents, teachers, friends, preachers, politicians – from the pretty woman on a radical website who lures people or the man in the next cell who proselytizes while in prison. They might grow from pictures seen on the nightly news or from acts of discrimination or repression that you don’t think much about on the day of occurrence, but which come back to haunt. It could come from the desire to avenge the death of a loved one. In some cases, they may come from a lost job or from the contrast between one family’s empty dinner plate and a fancy restaurant’s lavish menu. The poison might even come from within, in the form of rebellion against anonymity, the desire to belong to a group, people who want a moment of visibility and identity, or the hunger for black and white answers to problems that are very complex in a remarkably more complicated world.
We can all understand the search for meaning and doubts about authority, because at one time or another, most of us have been there. But it’s a huge leap between personal disquiet and committing murder, mayhem. So let there be no confusion or doubt: Whatever one’s individual experience might be, there are no grounds of history, religion, ideology, psychology, politics or economic disadvantage, or personal ambition that will ever justify the killing of children, the kidnapping or rape of teenage girls, or the slaughter of unarmed civilians. These atrocities cannot be rationalized; they cannot be excused. They must be opposed and they must be stopped. Whether in classrooms or houses of worship or over the internet or on TV, our message is very straightforward. To anyone who’s in doubt, we can say with conviction to have no doubt there’s a better way to serve God, a better way to protect loved ones, a better way to defend a community, a better way to seek justice, a better way to become known, a better way to live than by embracing violent extremism. In fact, there is no worse way to do any of those things.
Our challenge then is not really one of marshaling facts, because the facts are wholly on our side. Our task is to encourage the most credible leaders and spokespersons to penetrate the barrier of terrorist lies and to do so over and over and over again. We have to support the right people saying the right things all the time. That also means that we have to be crystal clear in separating what we oppose from what we should always be eager to defend. We have to be steadfast advocates of religious freedom, supporters of the right to peaceful dissent, opponents of bigotry in every form, and builders of opportunity for all.
Friends, our arms are open. Our minds are open to the ideas. The partnership against violent extremism that we are assembling has room for anyone who is willing to respect the fundamental rights and dignity of other human beings. And so it is appropriate this morning that we will be privileged to hear from the secretary-general of the United Nations, an organization whose founding, purpose, is to encourage us all to practice tolerance and live together in peace. Through these – through its efforts at peacebuilding, conflict resolution, development, the UN has obviously been an invaluable contributor to the long-term battle against international terror and the global partnership that is represented here today. This effort is not something taking place outside of the UN; this is to support the UN resolution, respect to this, and is to support the efforts that we have all been part of for so long.
In 2006, Ban Ki-moon was chosen to lead the UN. Five years later he was reelected. He’s been a voice of healing and reconciliation. And despite the fact that the job of secretary-general is nearly impossible, Ban Ki-moon has become known across the globe for his energy and his commitment. And it’s my honor to present to you the Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-Moon. (Applause.)
Outlining an Action Agenda to Counter Violent Extremism
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism
Washington, DC
February 19, 2015
SECRETARY KERRY: So good morning, all. That video very briefly are some of the images of terror and much of the rationale for our being here today. Nobody wants the good to die young, and we all have an enormous obligation, enormous responsibility to find the ways to meet this scourge.
This is the ministerial component of these several days here in Washington, and I want to thank everybody. I know that the schedule of any minister in government today is enormously challenging. So for all of you to come here and spend this much time is really a reflection of the deep commitment and concern about the challenges that we face.
And at the White House yesterday, local practitioners and civil society leaders from around the world gathered to highlight the community-led efforts that can prevent terrorist recruitment and infiltration. There’s been a silly debate in the media in the last days about sort of what you have to do. You have to do everything. You have to take the people off the battlefield who are there today, but you’re kind of stupid if all you do is do that and you don’t prevent more people from going to the battlefield. So we have a broad challenge here. And mostly it is to talk about facts and realities and to take those realities and put them into a real strategy that we all implement together. No one country, no one army, no one group is going to be able to respond to this adequately. And we see that in the numbers of countries that are now being touched by it.
So our goal today is to build on the discussions of the last two days by looking at ways both to address the most alarming threats that we face, but also to get practical, to strengthen the role of civil society – in particular women, youth, and victims – and to ensure that civil society has the space to be able to operate. We need to identify and amplify credible voices, expanding religious and other education that promotes tolerance and peace and respect for all religions; we need to address the social, economic, and political marginalization that is part of this challenge.
When I was recently in a country in northern Africa, the foreign minister there over a good dinner told me about the challenge of a certain portion of their population where young people are just proselytized and captured at a very young stage, paid money in some cases. And once their minds are full of this invective and this distortion, they don’t need to pay them anymore. But what was chilling was, this foreign minister said to me, they don’t have a five-year strategy; they have a 35-year strategy. And so we have to come together and say, “What’s our strategy? How are we going to respond?”;
Our goal today is to take this chance to think broadly about how to prevent violent ideologies from taking hold, and how to prevent terrorist networks such as ISIL or Boko Haram or any group of other names from linking up with aggrieved groups elsewhere, and how to prevent them from thereby expanding their influence.
This morning, I expect that the secretary-general and President Obama will urge us to push ahead as far and as fast as we can to work on the – to develop the work streams that we have already identified. And some of our efforts are going to take place in public gatherings such as this. But I think everybody here understands that much of this work is going to be done quietly, without fanfare, in classrooms, in community centers, in workplaces, in houses of worship, on urban street corners, and in village markets. In the months to come, we will have regional summits, and I’m sure we’ll have other events, which will gauge the progress and measure the next steps. And in New York this fall, our leaders will come together as a group. But between now and then, we must all contribute, and our collaboration and our cooperation must be constant.
Now, we need to remember that our adversaries don’t have to cope with distractions. They don’t have a broad set of responsibilities to fulfill. They don’t have the same institutional responsibilities that we do to meet the needs of our citizens. Terror is their obsession. It’s what they do. And if we let them, their singleness of purpose could actually wind up giving them a comparative advantage. But with the images of recent outbreaks fresh in our minds, everybody here knows we simply can’t let that happen. We have to match their commitment and we have to leave them with no advantage at all.
And this morning, we will begin with a session devoted to a single word: why. Why do people make what to many of us would seem to be an utterly wrongheaded choice and become the kind of terrorists that we’re seeing? It’s a question that we need to approach with humility, but also with determination, because you cannot defeat what you don’t understand. Certainly, there is no single answer.
In our era, poisonous ideas can come from almost anywhere – from parents, teachers, friends, preachers, politicians – from the pretty woman on a radical website who lures people or the man in the next cell who proselytizes while in prison. They might grow from pictures seen on the nightly news or from acts of discrimination or repression that you don’t think much about on the day of occurrence, but which come back to haunt. It could come from the desire to avenge the death of a loved one. In some cases, they may come from a lost job or from the contrast between one family’s empty dinner plate and a fancy restaurant’s lavish menu. The poison might even come from within, in the form of rebellion against anonymity, the desire to belong to a group, people who want a moment of visibility and identity, or the hunger for black and white answers to problems that are very complex in a remarkably more complicated world.
We can all understand the search for meaning and doubts about authority, because at one time or another, most of us have been there. But it’s a huge leap between personal disquiet and committing murder, mayhem. So let there be no confusion or doubt: Whatever one’s individual experience might be, there are no grounds of history, religion, ideology, psychology, politics or economic disadvantage, or personal ambition that will ever justify the killing of children, the kidnapping or rape of teenage girls, or the slaughter of unarmed civilians. These atrocities cannot be rationalized; they cannot be excused. They must be opposed and they must be stopped. Whether in classrooms or houses of worship or over the internet or on TV, our message is very straightforward. To anyone who’s in doubt, we can say with conviction to have no doubt there’s a better way to serve God, a better way to protect loved ones, a better way to defend a community, a better way to seek justice, a better way to become known, a better way to live than by embracing violent extremism. In fact, there is no worse way to do any of those things.
Our challenge then is not really one of marshaling facts, because the facts are wholly on our side. Our task is to encourage the most credible leaders and spokespersons to penetrate the barrier of terrorist lies and to do so over and over and over again. We have to support the right people saying the right things all the time. That also means that we have to be crystal clear in separating what we oppose from what we should always be eager to defend. We have to be steadfast advocates of religious freedom, supporters of the right to peaceful dissent, opponents of bigotry in every form, and builders of opportunity for all.
Friends, our arms are open. Our minds are open to the ideas. The partnership against violent extremism that we are assembling has room for anyone who is willing to respect the fundamental rights and dignity of other human beings. And so it is appropriate this morning that we will be privileged to hear from the secretary-general of the United Nations, an organization whose founding, purpose, is to encourage us all to practice tolerance and live together in peace. Through these – through its efforts at peacebuilding, conflict resolution, development, the UN has obviously been an invaluable contributor to the long-term battle against international terror and the global partnership that is represented here today. This effort is not something taking place outside of the UN; this is to support the UN resolution, respect to this, and is to support the efforts that we have all been part of for so long.
In 2006, Ban Ki-moon was chosen to lead the UN. Five years later he was reelected. He’s been a voice of healing and reconciliation. And despite the fact that the job of secretary-general is nearly impossible, Ban Ki-moon has become known across the globe for his energy and his commitment. And it’s my honor to present to you the Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-Moon. (Applause.)
Sunday, December 1, 2013
U.S. OFFICIAL'S REMARKS AT UN CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Opening Statement at the UN Convention Against Corruption
Remarks
M. Brooke Darby
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
5th Conference of the States Parties
Panama City, Panama
November 25, 2013
Chairman, distinguished delegates, I would like to thank the Republic of Panama for the warm hospitality it has shown to the delegations gathered here for this Fifth Conference of States Parties to the UN Convention against Corruption. I would also like to thank President Martinelli for his inspiring words this morning, and I congratulate Panama on assuming the Presidency of the Conference.
In two weeks we will celebrate the tenth anniversary of the UN Convention against Corruption. Much has been accomplished, even since this Conference last met in Marrakech in 2011:
168 countries are now States Parties to the Convention.
The review mechanism has completed its third year of reviews.
25 countries have published not only their executive summaries, but also their self-assessment checklists and/or their final country reports.
The States Parties and Secretariat have collaborated with a wide range of other states, international organizations, civil society, and other partners in efforts to implement the Convention.
But there is more we can do. As we reflect on our accomplishments and celebrate the UNCAC’s 10th anniversary, let us also seize the opportunity we have here to build upon past progress and further our primary goal of implementing the Convention.
The Review Mechanism
The Review Mechanism has been a key focus of our endeavors over the past several years. The country reviews have promoted domestic coordination, provided information about our respective and collective implementation efforts, and helped identify potential areas for technical assistance. Nevertheless, as we approach the second round of reviews, it is critical to assess how we can improve the Mechanism in light of our experiences in the first round. While the second review cycle will not be launched until the Conference of States Parties in 2015, we look forward to a dialogue this week about possible ways to strengthen the Mechanism:
For example, the scope of the articles to be reviewed in the second cycle should be narrowed to allow for deeper examination of areas chosen for review, while making the Mechanism less burdensome overall to participating experts and the Secretariat.
We must better share the wealth of information collected from reviews, particularly regarding technical assistance needs.
We also can make the review process more inclusive and transparent, including by allowing private sector and civil society input into technical assistance discussions and related efforts.
Asset Recovery
As interest in asset recovery continues to increase, the Asset Recovery Working Group has proven to be a valuable venue for the exchange of good practices and for building trust. Drawing on that forum and work by initiatives such as the Arab Forum on Asset Recovery, the Lausanne Process, and Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative (StAR), the United States is introducing a resolution that highlights areas where we think we can do more.
The resolution’s goals include:
improving the early exchange of information, including by having our investigators work side-by-side to trace corruption proceeds;
encouraging strong domestic coordination;
encouraging consultation and proactive guidance before formal MLA requests are submitted; and
increasing participation in practitioner networks.
We can surmount barriers to asset recovery by undertaking proactive tracing searches in certain circumstances. We can recommit to supporting capacity building that is tailored and practice-based. As we each have different legal frameworks, we should make information about our respective asset recovery laws and procedures widely available, as through the practical guides the United States, the G8, and now the G20 are making available.
We should look for ways to make our legal frameworks more effective – such as by examining the benefits of approaches like non-conviction-based forfeiture.
Furthermore, the Asset Recovery Working Group should continue its good work and be tasked to provide recommendations regarding the scope of the Chapter V articles to be reviewed in the second cycle.
Prevention
Prevention also deserves our attention. The Prevention Chapter is rich, covering a broad array of topics and practices. We have identified some excellent ideas for implementation during our discussions in the Prevention Working Group. We should ensure the Conference continues these expert exchanges, while at the same time tasking the experts to consider how we may most effectively review the broad technical range of this chapter during the second round.
Civil Society
I also want to stress the important role of civil society in preventing and combating corruption, including by raising public awareness and helping keep governments accountable –the foundation of Article 13 of the Convention. This Conference always anticipated that civil society would play a contributing role in the important deliberations of this body and the various Working Groups and subsidiary bodies. All States Parties should pledge to embrace this supporting role.
International Cooperation
Finally, we still need to find ways to maximize efficiency and synergies in international cooperation. We continue to believe that we should discuss international cooperation via UNCAC through the ongoing work of the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime’s Working Group on International Cooperation, particularly given that the international cooperation provisions in these conventions are almost identical.
In conclusion, the United States believes that our collective efforts over the past several years have been fruitful in advancing our ultimate goal of implementing the Convention and that even more can be accomplished working in partnership. We look forward to working together over the course of this week and beyond to find ways to improve the effectiveness of our collective efforts.
Thank you.
Opening Statement at the UN Convention Against Corruption
Remarks
M. Brooke Darby
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
5th Conference of the States Parties
Panama City, Panama
November 25, 2013
Chairman, distinguished delegates, I would like to thank the Republic of Panama for the warm hospitality it has shown to the delegations gathered here for this Fifth Conference of States Parties to the UN Convention against Corruption. I would also like to thank President Martinelli for his inspiring words this morning, and I congratulate Panama on assuming the Presidency of the Conference.
In two weeks we will celebrate the tenth anniversary of the UN Convention against Corruption. Much has been accomplished, even since this Conference last met in Marrakech in 2011:
168 countries are now States Parties to the Convention.
The review mechanism has completed its third year of reviews.
25 countries have published not only their executive summaries, but also their self-assessment checklists and/or their final country reports.
The States Parties and Secretariat have collaborated with a wide range of other states, international organizations, civil society, and other partners in efforts to implement the Convention.
But there is more we can do. As we reflect on our accomplishments and celebrate the UNCAC’s 10th anniversary, let us also seize the opportunity we have here to build upon past progress and further our primary goal of implementing the Convention.
The Review Mechanism
The Review Mechanism has been a key focus of our endeavors over the past several years. The country reviews have promoted domestic coordination, provided information about our respective and collective implementation efforts, and helped identify potential areas for technical assistance. Nevertheless, as we approach the second round of reviews, it is critical to assess how we can improve the Mechanism in light of our experiences in the first round. While the second review cycle will not be launched until the Conference of States Parties in 2015, we look forward to a dialogue this week about possible ways to strengthen the Mechanism:
For example, the scope of the articles to be reviewed in the second cycle should be narrowed to allow for deeper examination of areas chosen for review, while making the Mechanism less burdensome overall to participating experts and the Secretariat.
We must better share the wealth of information collected from reviews, particularly regarding technical assistance needs.
We also can make the review process more inclusive and transparent, including by allowing private sector and civil society input into technical assistance discussions and related efforts.
Asset Recovery
As interest in asset recovery continues to increase, the Asset Recovery Working Group has proven to be a valuable venue for the exchange of good practices and for building trust. Drawing on that forum and work by initiatives such as the Arab Forum on Asset Recovery, the Lausanne Process, and Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative (StAR), the United States is introducing a resolution that highlights areas where we think we can do more.
The resolution’s goals include:
improving the early exchange of information, including by having our investigators work side-by-side to trace corruption proceeds;
encouraging strong domestic coordination;
encouraging consultation and proactive guidance before formal MLA requests are submitted; and
increasing participation in practitioner networks.
We can surmount barriers to asset recovery by undertaking proactive tracing searches in certain circumstances. We can recommit to supporting capacity building that is tailored and practice-based. As we each have different legal frameworks, we should make information about our respective asset recovery laws and procedures widely available, as through the practical guides the United States, the G8, and now the G20 are making available.
We should look for ways to make our legal frameworks more effective – such as by examining the benefits of approaches like non-conviction-based forfeiture.
Furthermore, the Asset Recovery Working Group should continue its good work and be tasked to provide recommendations regarding the scope of the Chapter V articles to be reviewed in the second cycle.
Prevention
Prevention also deserves our attention. The Prevention Chapter is rich, covering a broad array of topics and practices. We have identified some excellent ideas for implementation during our discussions in the Prevention Working Group. We should ensure the Conference continues these expert exchanges, while at the same time tasking the experts to consider how we may most effectively review the broad technical range of this chapter during the second round.
Civil Society
I also want to stress the important role of civil society in preventing and combating corruption, including by raising public awareness and helping keep governments accountable –the foundation of Article 13 of the Convention. This Conference always anticipated that civil society would play a contributing role in the important deliberations of this body and the various Working Groups and subsidiary bodies. All States Parties should pledge to embrace this supporting role.
International Cooperation
Finally, we still need to find ways to maximize efficiency and synergies in international cooperation. We continue to believe that we should discuss international cooperation via UNCAC through the ongoing work of the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime’s Working Group on International Cooperation, particularly given that the international cooperation provisions in these conventions are almost identical.
In conclusion, the United States believes that our collective efforts over the past several years have been fruitful in advancing our ultimate goal of implementing the Convention and that even more can be accomplished working in partnership. We look forward to working together over the course of this week and beyond to find ways to improve the effectiveness of our collective efforts.
Thank you.
Tuesday, October 8, 2013
NEW REPORT RELEASED ON CHILD AND FORCED LABOR
FROM: U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT
US Labor Department commemorates 20 years of work combating international child labor with release of new reporting and $26 million in grants
WASHINGTON — Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez today announced the release of a new report and updated list on child labor and forced labor and the award of $26 million in grants to combat child labor in four countries. The event at the department's headquarters included remarks by Secretary Perez, Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa and former Secretary of Labor Alexis Herman, as well as a video message from Dr. Maya Soetoro-Ng of the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
"These reports remind us that children and adults continue to be exploited for their labor in countries around the world. Until this is no longer true, our work is not done," said Secretary Perez. "We need to call upon governments, international and regional organizations, social partners and civil society to work together to end these human rights abuses." New global estimates from the International Labour Organization place the number of child laborers at 168 million worldwide.
The department's twelfth annual edition of its "Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor," a report mandated by the Trade and Development Act of 2000, which analyzes the worst forms of child labor in 143 foreign countries and territories. The report assesses efforts in countries to eliminate the worst forms of child labor, tracking from year to year whether a country has made significant, moderate, minimal or no advancement. This year, 10 countries, more than ever before, received an assessment of significant advancement.
"I have long had a vision of a world free of the scourge of exploitative child labor," said Senator Harkin. "This report is one of our most effective tools in this fight. It is a voice for the voiceless and a call to action on their behalf. We must sustain this fight for as long as it takes."
The department also released an update of its "List of Goods Produced by Child or Forced Labor," as required by the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005, and announced its decision to remove three goods (charcoal from Namibia, diamonds from Zimbabwe and tobacco from Kazakhstan) from that list. The updated list includes a total of 134 goods from 73 countries that the department's Bureau of International Labor Affairs has reason to believe are produced by forced labor, child labor or both in violation of international standards.
As part of the department's international efforts to combat child labor, Secretary Perez also announced $26 million in awards for the following projects in four countries:
$2 million to reduce child labor in home-based carpet production in Afghanistan awarded to GoodWeave USA;
$9 million to combat child labor in the mining sector in Colombia awarded to Pact Inc.;
$10 million to reduce child labor and improve labor rights and working conditions in agriculture in the Dominican Republic awarded to Catholic Relief Services; and
$5 million to combat child labor in the tea sector in Rwanda awarded to Winrock International.
Since 1993, ILAB has produced reports to raise awareness globally about child labor and forced labor and funded projects that provide assistance to vulnerable children and their families. ILAB has funded more than 270 projects in more than 90 countries to combat the worst forms of child labor. In addition to providing international technical assistance in support of U.S. foreign and labor policy objectives, the agency lead's the Department of Labor's efforts to ensure that workers around the world are treated fairly and are able to share in the benefits of the global economy. ILAB's global mission is to improve working conditions, raise living standards, protect workers' ability to exercise their rights and address the workplace exploitation of children and other vulnerable populations.
US Labor Department commemorates 20 years of work combating international child labor with release of new reporting and $26 million in grants
WASHINGTON — Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez today announced the release of a new report and updated list on child labor and forced labor and the award of $26 million in grants to combat child labor in four countries. The event at the department's headquarters included remarks by Secretary Perez, Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa and former Secretary of Labor Alexis Herman, as well as a video message from Dr. Maya Soetoro-Ng of the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
"These reports remind us that children and adults continue to be exploited for their labor in countries around the world. Until this is no longer true, our work is not done," said Secretary Perez. "We need to call upon governments, international and regional organizations, social partners and civil society to work together to end these human rights abuses." New global estimates from the International Labour Organization place the number of child laborers at 168 million worldwide.
The department's twelfth annual edition of its "Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor," a report mandated by the Trade and Development Act of 2000, which analyzes the worst forms of child labor in 143 foreign countries and territories. The report assesses efforts in countries to eliminate the worst forms of child labor, tracking from year to year whether a country has made significant, moderate, minimal or no advancement. This year, 10 countries, more than ever before, received an assessment of significant advancement.
"I have long had a vision of a world free of the scourge of exploitative child labor," said Senator Harkin. "This report is one of our most effective tools in this fight. It is a voice for the voiceless and a call to action on their behalf. We must sustain this fight for as long as it takes."
The department also released an update of its "List of Goods Produced by Child or Forced Labor," as required by the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005, and announced its decision to remove three goods (charcoal from Namibia, diamonds from Zimbabwe and tobacco from Kazakhstan) from that list. The updated list includes a total of 134 goods from 73 countries that the department's Bureau of International Labor Affairs has reason to believe are produced by forced labor, child labor or both in violation of international standards.
As part of the department's international efforts to combat child labor, Secretary Perez also announced $26 million in awards for the following projects in four countries:
$2 million to reduce child labor in home-based carpet production in Afghanistan awarded to GoodWeave USA;
$9 million to combat child labor in the mining sector in Colombia awarded to Pact Inc.;
$10 million to reduce child labor and improve labor rights and working conditions in agriculture in the Dominican Republic awarded to Catholic Relief Services; and
$5 million to combat child labor in the tea sector in Rwanda awarded to Winrock International.
Since 1993, ILAB has produced reports to raise awareness globally about child labor and forced labor and funded projects that provide assistance to vulnerable children and their families. ILAB has funded more than 270 projects in more than 90 countries to combat the worst forms of child labor. In addition to providing international technical assistance in support of U.S. foreign and labor policy objectives, the agency lead's the Department of Labor's efforts to ensure that workers around the world are treated fairly and are able to share in the benefits of the global economy. ILAB's global mission is to improve working conditions, raise living standards, protect workers' ability to exercise their rights and address the workplace exploitation of children and other vulnerable populations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)