You also can be a part of it!
CADAL launched the initiative »Point out and shame dictatorships» which consists in comparing the intervention of our country with another one that deserves to be highlighted. For example, last January 23 took place the 4th UPR of China, considered »autocracy», »not free country» and with »closed civic space», where CADAL highlights the intervention of the United Kingdom and invites to qualify Argentina’s intervention to monitor its commitment to human rights and international democratic solidarity.
Javier Milei’s refusal to invite autocratic countries to his presidential inauguration implies, on the one hand, not granting them »equal treatment», since their representatives lack the democratic legitimacy that he has and, on the other hand, sending a message of international democratic solidarity to the victims of repression and state terrorism in autocracies.
CADAL’s Consultant on Global Projects participated in the Special Session of the CAJP on lessons learned and exchange of good practices on freedom of peaceful assembly and association, of the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs. He was the only representative of civil society to point out the situation in Cuba. Complained by colleagues from the San Isidro Movement (Cuba) and La Corriente Feminista (Nicaragua), member organizations of the Coalition for Freedom of Association.
Once again it is not understood how the government decides with regrettable obsequiousness - worthy of “carnal relations” - to celebrate the birthday of dictators. Moreover, he does it at a party full of autocratic guests from all regions and trends, as evidenced by presences ranging from the sanguinary Philippine leader Rodrigo Duterte to the Cuban autocrat Miguel Diaz Canel. From right to left, from east to west and from north to south.
However, the non-cooperation of some states, obvious yet again on this occasion, was, as the French human rights ambassador Francois Croquette put it, “the elephant in the room”. The fact that Bolivia, Cuba, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, and Senegal declined the invitation to participate in the discussion, reflects one aspect that explains why the HRC has been criticized. Some countries have been mocking the international human rights protection mechanisms by sitting on the HRC while at the same time blatantly violating their citizens’ human rights back home.
Of all the controls that people all over the world have accepted with little protest in the name of public health, the prohibition of movement is the most consequential. …[C]ombining trustworthy government information, solidarity with the desperate, and pragmatic technology would surely be an improvement over the mass lockdowns in place in much of the world.
From the perspective of the commitment to human rights, the decision of the new Uruguayan authorities -that will assume office next March 1- to not include the region’s autocrats in the swearing in ceremony is consistent with their values. It speaks badly of an exemplary democracy to give “equal treatment and respect” to leaders in other countries that were not elected through free, fair and competitive elections.
(Global Americans) Under Argentina’s new government, foreign policy decisions based more on ideological affinity than on greater pragmatism could bare serious consequences for the country, more so when dealing with non-democratic countries.
Agreements in which destination countries, which are usually developed democracies, pay for not having to accept more migrants, are not what humanitarian advocates who argue in favor of international cooperation to face migration crises usually have in mind. However, cooperation to restrict immigration is more common worldwide than is cooperation in a liberal direction.
(The Global Americans) A month after promoting the establishment of PROSUR, Chilean President Sebastián Piñera contradicted the central principles of the new regional bloc during a trip to China.
(Global Americans) At a time when democracy is regressing globally, it’s crucial for civil society to step up and affirm international commitment to democracy and solidarity with victims of authoritarianism. This message would have been especially well received in Argentina, which is still healing from its brush with dictatorship. If civil society continues to fail to do so, the G20 can hardly make a difference in its original goal: improving the welfare of the most vulnerable people around the world.
