1

Best Practices in Defending the Human Rights of Scientists

Clare Robinson, Scholars at Risk

www.scholarsatrisk.org

2

About Scholars at Risk

• An international network (30 countries)– Universities, colleges, academic associations

• Variety of academic fields– 64% of cases: sciences

• What does SAR do?– Protective relocation– Promote academic freedom and university values– Advocacy and monitoring

3

Partners

• Council for Assisting Refugee Academics, UK

• Network for Education and Academic Rights, UK

• University Assistance Fund, Netherlands• American Association for the Advancement

of Science, USA• Front Line Defenders, Ireland• Institute of International Education’s Schol

ar Rescue Fund, USA …among many

others.

4

New frontiers in AF & HR

• Developing a cadre of experts in AF & HR

• Tools for measurement

• Global reporting system

5

Advocacy and monitoring

● SAR’s public Scholars in Prison list− Repository of information− Provides guidance for actions− Increasing public awareness− Alerts colleagues to SAR’s interest in these

cases

● Visit: http://scholarsatrisk.nyu.edu/Education-Advocacy/Scholars-in-Prison.php

6

Assessing cases

• Evaluate/generate information sources– Primary sources, corroboration, bias/agenda

• Identify gaps and questions • Assess wider local/national context• Variety of academic fields

– Trends, current political situation

• Follow your organization’s assessment process

7

Interviewing primary sources

• Academic background?• Nature of the event/violation?• Media or other evidence available?• Significance of timing of event?• Whoa re the key stakeholders in the

event?• What steps are others taking?• Is there any additional information that

would assist with risk assessment?

8

Case study: Assessment

Two Russian chemists, Professors Bobyshev and Afanasyev, imprisoned in 2010

• Evaluate/generate sources– Interviewing nominator– Media research– Outreach to faculty in our network

• Identify gaps/questions• Assess wider local/national context

– Resembles previous Russian cases– Two professors with identical charges

9

Actions• Private intervention

– Lobbying– Private meetings and travel– Private letters

• Public intervention– Information sharing– Public letters and alerts– Site visits– Media contacts

• Consider joint action on any of the above

10

Actions specific to associations• Keeping h. rts. on the agenda at meetings• Raising cases with international colleagues• Develop a statement on your assoc.’s work

in human rights• Establish a clear response mechanism• Identify partners, join networks• Compile a list of ways the association can

promote human rights, and share this– Site visits, letter-writing, presenting on h.

rts. at conferences, job/networking opportunities for at-risk scientists, joining advocacy campaigns

11

Case study: Actions• Letters sent publicly

– To President and General Public Prosecutor• Alert sent to networks

– Call for letters– Sent to SAR listserv and members– Sample letter of appeal distributed with SAR

holiday mailing 2010, for members to sign and mail

• Information-sharing– Profiles on website– Flyer on scientists’ arrest mailed to all

partners

12

What human rights standards exist to support action?

• Standards exist at all levels – Sub-national and national (developed by

national experts)– Regional and international standards

• Scientists enjoy recourse to:1.general human rights standards as well as

(Scientists are people too!)

2.specific provisions for academic freedom, science knowledge, education, etc.

13

Gen’l human rights standards & mechanisms

• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)• Int’l Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)• Int’l Covenant on Economic Social & Cultural Rts

(ICESCR)

• Specialized human rights treaties (torture, gender, race)

…may include appeals to expert monitoring committee

• UN special mechanisms (High commissioner & rapporteurs)

• Regional human rights systems (European, InterAmerican, African)

• National human rights commissionsAppropriate standards depends on country involved and status. Current status at

http://www2.ohchr.org/Additional information on standards and mechanisms:

http://academicfreedom.info/workshops/b_standards.html

14

Common violations of human rights standards

• Restrictions on speech, opinion thought (UDHR 18, 19)

• Restrictions on association (UDHR 20)

• Restrictions on travel (UDHR 13)

• Improper/unlawful detention/imprisonment (UDHR 9)

• Denial of fair trial (UDHR 10, 11)

• Abuse in custody, including torture (UDHR 5)

• Disappearance or extrajudicial killing (UDHR

3)

15

Science & education specific standards in the general human rights

instruments

• UDHR & ICCPR Arts. 18 & 19 (thought & opinion)

• UDHR Art. 20 & ICCPR Arts. 20 & 21 (association)

• UDHR Art. 26 & ICESCR Art. 13 (education)

• UDHR Art. 27 & ICESCR Art. 15 (culture & science)

• …with similar provisions in the regional human rights instruments

16

Standards & mechanisms for science & H.Ed.

• 1966 ILO/UNESCO Recommendation on Status of Teachers

• 1997 UNESCO Rec on Status of Higher Ed Teaching Personnel– Includes academic freedom, autonomy and accountability

• Joint ILO/UNESCO Committee of Experts on the Application of the Recommendations concerning Teaching Personnel (CEART)

• UNESCO Committee on Conventions and Recommendations (CR)

• Joint UNESCO (CR) / ECOSOC (CESCR) Expert Group

17

Case study: Standards

The indefinite pretrial detention of Professors Bobyshev and Afanasyev without formal charges seemingly contravenes international standards of:

• Due process (UDHR, Art. 9)• Fair trial (UDHR, Art. 10 and 11) and• Detention procedures (ICCPR, Art. 9).

Check whether the country in question is party to the treaty referenced.

18

Drafting effective letters and alerts

• Definition and purpose• Research the issue• Identify relevant standards• Draft alert

• Include title, date, contact info, opening paragraph, mention, international treaties, background info, call for action, contact info for letters, titles/greetings for letters

• More information: http://www.academicfreedom.info/workshops/c_actions_additional.html#actionalerts.

• Evaluate & follow-up• Monitor situation, monitor media, keep in touch with sources and

partners, consider follow-up letters if no change, consider requesting meetings, consider increasing pressure by multiplying efforts

19

Case study: Follow up• Monitor media

– No media developments• Keep in touch with sources and partners

– No news from primary sources• Consider follow-up letter

– Russian gov’t replied to SAR’s letter• Should we reply?• What do you think SAR’s next steps should be?

20

Helpful links• Scholars at Risk: www.scholarsatrisk.org • News + alerts (NEAR):

www.nearinternational.org• Standards + actions (SAR-NEAR workshops

website): http://www.academicfreedom.info/workshops/home.html

• Human rights treaty bodies (OHCHR): http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/treaty/

• Signatories (OHCHR): http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/treaty/docs/HRChart.xls

21

Many thanks to you and to ACS for your efforts on behalf of threatened scientists.

Scholars at Risk Networkc/o New York University

194 Mercer Street, 4th FloorNew York, NY 10012 USAwww.scholarsatrisk.org

1-212-998-2179 (tel)1-212-995-4402 (fax)

scholarsatrisk@nyu.edu