NGOs` critical role in advancing
human rights in transition societies

by Albrecht Schnabel and Shale Horowitz

Human rights violations tend to be particularly severe in societies that are undergoing significant political, social and economic transformations. Improving human rights practices in transition societies should therefore be a central goal for domestic reformers and the international community alike. This makes sense not only because of the intrinsic value of improved human rights protections, but also because of the indirect effects that such improvements have on democratization, economic development, and conflict resolution.

Today’s international human rights regime consists of an accumulating body of internationally accepted norms and legal instruments, along with efforts by International Governmental Organizations (IGOs), NGOs, and national governments to promote improved human rights practices. Unfortunately, the process of abstract standard setting has made more rapid progress than efforts to legitimize and enforce the standards in practice. Practical efforts by IGOs and governments have been slow: States still give priority to the principle of non-intervention, and their own security and economic interests constrain their promotion of human rights abroad.

Human rights NGOs and their individual and organizational supporters are key to a more effective functioning of the international human rights regime. NGOs are largely unconstrained by national interests. Although they have their own ideological biases, competition among them produces a large and relatively objective stream of information about human rights practices around the world. Just as importantly, NGOs are engaged in ongoing efforts to popularize and advance the whole panoply of human rights causes around the world. These informational and advocacy functions can potentially have significant impacts on elite and public opinion, fertilizing and organizing local human rights traditions and movements to the point where they become prominent and influential in domestic culture and politics. This slow, decentralized process of building human rights awareness through local contacts is probably the international human rights regime’s most powerful and consistent force for positive change.

Yet human rights NGOs and their supporters are strongly constrained by local conditions. Most importantly, ruling regimes may impose strong restrictions against organized human rights advocacy, to the point of imposing arbitrary, draconian punishments on all those who try. There are also other types of barriers. Based on past national and local experiences, human rights NGOs may be associated with undesirable imposition of alien standards and policies. And even when the will is there, more pressing needs and threats – such as poverty, economic instability and civil conflict – necessarily limit locally available audiences and resources.

Careful analyses of the international human rights regime, and of country and regional case studies, show that the creation of international human rights norms and decentralized propagation of these norms by NGOs have a greater impact than actions taken by states – whether individually through their own foreign policies or collectively through decisions of IGOs.1) This is because state policies reflect state interests and, even under the best of circumstances, are inconsistent and of limited scope. In large part thanks to the work of local and international NGOs, even for the most repressive regimes human rights norms have become difficult to ignore. It is a victory for the human rights cause that such regimes feel compelled to make up excuses for their abuses, thus implicitly admitting fault and accepting the need for remedial action.

Wherever regimes allow sufficient freedom, and as long as human rights norms can be plausibly presented as consistent with local traditions and widely held collective goals, they tend to be embraced by wide segments of public opinion – including not only the opposition but also important elements traditionally allied with authoritarian rulers. In this way, human rights norms have been widely embraced in post-communist countries, in many parts of post-Cold War Africa, in Argentina (and most of the rest of Latin America), in Turkey, in South Korea and Taiwan, and in India. Even in highly authoritarian countries such as Iran and the PRC, human rights norms have been widely accepted by the opposition, much of the population, and influential segments of the elite.

To keep this momentum alive, NGOs must address a number of key challenges:

• In general, NGOs working at local and international levels need to make governments aware of human rights abuses in their (and other) countries, advocate the ratification of human rights conventions, and promote human rights legislation and education. NGOs need to work to reduce the gap between those who have and those who do not have access to political, economic and legal resources within society. NGOs need to continue and strengthen their focus on public and mass education for tolerance, respect and protection of rights. They need to emphasize peace and human rights education inside and outside schools and universities. In turn, an educated citizenry will place greater pressure on its own governments to respect human rights at home and to intervene abroad to prevent human rights tragedies.

• NGOs need to encourage opinion makers, educators, and faith-based organizations and movements to support peaceful resolutions to conflict, rather than incite adversity. They must also monitor government policies and the field activities of regional organizations and the UN. They must monitor activities of other NGO actors, thus offering some much-needed legitimacy and accountability of NGOs. Local and international NGOs need to assure transparency and accountability of their work and procedures to reduce accusations of paternalism and corruption. Mutual codes of conduct are crucial in this effort. They need to emphasize professionalism, non-partisanship and independence. Local NGOs must strive to become less dependent on foreign funding by establishing membership fees and engaging in local fundraising.

• NGOs need to be more comprehensive in their human rights work: They need to embrace the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in its entirety – they must focus not only (or mostly) on political and civil rights, but also on social and economic rights. Particularly local NGOs need to be more multicultural through norms, practice and personnel, to stem the loss of credibility among some parts of the population and elite, and to gain deeper understanding of the wide range of issues affecting all social or ethnic sectors of transition societies.

• NGOs must collaborate with regional organizations and the UN in advocating and promoting good human rights practices, and in monitoring human rights improvements. They need to curb turf fights and, instead, coordinate efforts with other NGOs. Moreover, international NGOs need to train and build capacities of domestic NGOs. More than at present, civil society actors must engage issues heavily affected by relativism. In this context, they need to play a critical role in social dialogue and persuasion, and search for constructive joint positions with traditional subgroups on issues of basic human rights. In collaboration with states and IGOs, they should give more attention to an evolving universalist consensus that does not incorporate all human rights, but distinguishes a rational core that reaches civil, economic and social rights.

Highlighting international human rights norms and the consequences of their violation can serve as a deterrent. It forces the international community to consider shared norms, apply them at early stages and, by doing so, prevent crises and avert much suffering. Then, human rights violators can be prosecuted and punished, human rights standards can be enforced, and human rights law can be (re)established. All along, democratization can be fostered and reinvigorated, economic development can narrow the inequality gap, violent conflicts can be addressed and prevented and, thus, conflict-related violations can be reduced. NGOs have a critical role to play in helping transition societies meet these crucial challenges.

These conclusions are based on preliminary findings of the study on Human Rights and Societies in Transition, jointly undertaken by the United Nations University and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and directed by the authors of this article. The results of the study culminate in country- and region-specific recommendations for state, nonstate and intergovernmental actors actively involved in assisting political, social and economic transition processes.

Index: Podium

NGOs' critical role in advancing human rights in transition societies
by Albrecht Schnabel and Sale Horowitz

Working Group 'Human Rights Education' - Impressios of a Participant
by Walter Fisher

Education for Democracy Foundation
by Krzysztof Stanowski

Focus on Schools and Communities
Interview by Maciej Kozyra with Krzysztof Kacuga

A modern classic on Human Rights Education
Bookreview by Jana Eschweiler

Law-related and democracy education for countries in transition
by David McQuoid-Mason