Progress at CSW70 despite increasing pushbacks against gender equality
|
Shobha Shukla – CNS
Contd from March 19
While regressive amendments on sexual and reproductive health and rights, fundamental freedoms, intersectionality, and reparations were rejected because of cross-regional mobilisation by feminist civil society and supportive governments (UN member states), negotiations revealed resistance by powerful governments (UN member states) and mobilised anti-gender anti-rights actors," she said.
Maitree criticised member states for approaching access to justice as a technical issue rather than a political issue, focusing on procedural reforms without addressing the structural conditions that produce injustice. "This allows governments to avoid confronting the political interests and power relations that sustain injustice, including systems of criminalisation, unequal economic relations, and political repression that disproportionately affects marginalised communities and countries across the global south. The refusal to name discriminatory laws, dilution of commitments under sovereignty clause, and phrases like "as applicable" allow existing social, political, and economic hierarchies to remain untouched,” said Maitree Muzumdar.
When negotiations assume that states are acting in good faith despite these realities, they risk reinforcing the barriers to access to justice and "prioritising state power over human rights and democratic participation."
“Resourcing discussions remained disconnected from macroeconomic policies which determine whether our justice systems can function at all. These policies are often shaped through global economic governance structures and international financial institutions which impose fiscal constraints on countries across the global south. Debt burdens and austerity frequently limit public spending, resulting in underfunded courts, limited legal aid services, and reduced access to essential services and remedies. Without addressing these structural economic constraints, commitments to strengthen access to justice remain difficult to realise in practice”, added Maitree Muzumdar.
Maitree was the opening keynote speaker at a press conference hosted by Women's Rights Caucus around 70th Session of the UN Commission on Status of Women (CSW70). This press conference was together co-hosted by co-convenors: Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD), The African Women’s Development and Communication Network, Fòs Feminista, Outright International, and Young Feminist Caucus; Global Center for Health Diplomacy and Inclusion (CeHDI) and CNS.
No gender justice possible under war, occupation and genocide
Ayshka Najib, co-convener of the Young Feminist Caucus was “appalled by the double standards in the room (where CSO70 deliberations were taking place) as one progressive country after the other from the west, 'called for ensuring access to justice and gender equality for all women and girls.' These were the same very states aiding and abetting billions of dollars in military violence and occupation in global south countries displacing and murdering millions of women and girls."
"We cannot have gender justice under war, occupation, and genocide. This is not a political agenda, but a call to action to recognise that CSW does not exist in isolation. As negotiators in that room debate repeatedly on our rights, our autonomy, our leadership, our freedom, the world is being torn to pieces," said Ayshka.
Another speaker Josefina Sabate, a feminist activist from Argentina, agreed that the political process of CSW70 has taken place in a highly adverse political context and the CSW70 outcome document is not as progressive as we might have wished. However, she praised the CSW’s chair’s ability to ensure that the document was adopted.
For Josefina "access to justice is not merely a technical matter. Women and girls face numerous obstacles - legal, financial, geographical, and institutional barriers - that hinder their access to justice, bodily autonomy, sexual and reproductive health services, and mechanisms for redress and reparation.
However, many countries in Latin America stand in opposition to this agenda”.
“Although we have laws that have been formally enacted, there remains a multitude of obstacles regarding access to these rights and services. The document in question frames this issue within a paradigm of development that places the sustainability of life - along with social and gender justice - at its very centre," she added.
(To be contd)
Contd from March 19
While regressive amendments on sexual and reproductive health and rights, fundamental freedoms, intersectionality, and reparations were rejected because of cross-regional mobilisation by feminist civil society and supportive governments (UN member states), negotiations revealed resistance by powerful governments (UN member states) and mobilised anti-gender anti-rights actors," she said.
Maitree criticised member states for approaching access to justice as a technical issue rather than a political issue, focusing on procedural reforms without addressing the structural conditions that produce injustice. "This allows governments to avoid confronting the political interests and power relations that sustain injustice, including systems of criminalisation, unequal economic relations, and political repression that disproportionately affects marginalised communities and countries across the global south. The refusal to name discriminatory laws, dilution of commitments under sovereignty clause, and phrases like "as applicable" allow existing social, political, and economic hierarchies to remain untouched,” said Maitree Muzumdar.
When negotiations assume that states are acting in good faith despite these realities, they risk reinforcing the barriers to access to justice and "prioritising state power over human rights and democratic participation."
“Resourcing discussions remained disconnected from macroeconomic policies which determine whether our justice systems can function at all. These policies are often shaped through global economic governance structures and international financial institutions which impose fiscal constraints on countries across the global south. Debt burdens and austerity frequently limit public spending, resulting in underfunded courts, limited legal aid services, and reduced access to essential services and remedies. Without addressing these structural economic constraints, commitments to strengthen access to justice remain difficult to realise in practice”, added Maitree Muzumdar.
Maitree was the opening keynote speaker at a press conference hosted by Women's Rights Caucus around 70th Session of the UN Commission on Status of Women (CSW70). This press conference was together co-hosted by co-convenors: Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD), The African Women’s Development and Communication Network, Fòs Feminista, Outright International, and Young Feminist Caucus; Global Center for Health Diplomacy and Inclusion (CeHDI) and CNS.
No gender justice possible under war, occupation and genocide
Ayshka Najib, co-convener of the Young Feminist Caucus was “appalled by the double standards in the room (where CSO70 deliberations were taking place) as one progressive country after the other from the west, 'called for ensuring access to justice and gender equality for all women and girls.' These were the same very states aiding and abetting billions of dollars in military violence and occupation in global south countries displacing and murdering millions of women and girls."
"We cannot have gender justice under war, occupation, and genocide. This is not a political agenda, but a call to action to recognise that CSW does not exist in isolation. As negotiators in that room debate repeatedly on our rights, our autonomy, our leadership, our freedom, the world is being torn to pieces," said Ayshka.
Another speaker Josefina Sabate, a feminist activist from Argentina, agreed that the political process of CSW70 has taken place in a highly adverse political context and the CSW70 outcome document is not as progressive as we might have wished. However, she praised the CSW’s chair’s ability to ensure that the document was adopted.
For Josefina "access to justice is not merely a technical matter. Women and girls face numerous obstacles - legal, financial, geographical, and institutional barriers - that hinder their access to justice, bodily autonomy, sexual and reproductive health services, and mechanisms for redress and reparation.
However, many countries in Latin America stand in opposition to this agenda”.
“Although we have laws that have been formally enacted, there remains a multitude of obstacles regarding access to these rights and services. The document in question frames this issue within a paradigm of development that places the sustainability of life - along with social and gender justice - at its very centre," she added.
(To be contd)