{"id":2714,"date":"2016-05-27T22:05:40","date_gmt":"2016-05-27T22:05:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.iuhrdf.org\/en\/2016\/05\/27\/nations-poor-human-rights-records-block-un-status-press-rights-group\/"},"modified":"2016-05-27T22:05:40","modified_gmt":"2016-05-27T22:05:40","slug":"nations-poor-human-rights-records-block-un-status-press-rights-group","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/nations-poor-human-rights-records-block-un-status-press-rights-group\/","title":{"rendered":"Nations with poor human rights records block U.N. status for press-rights group"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Countries with poor human rights records succeeded Thursday in blocking U.N.status for a well-regarded international press rights organization in what some diplomats see as a blow to free expression throughout the world.<\/p>\n<p>Tracy Wilkinson &nbsp;<br \/>\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b\u200b2016-05-27<\/p>\n<p>Countries with poor human rights records succeeded Thursday in blocking&nbsp;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.latimes.com\/topic\/politics-government\/government\/united-nations-ORGOVV000388-topic.html\" title=\"United Nations\">U.N.<\/a>status for a well-regarded international press rights&nbsp;organization in what some diplomats see as a blow to free expression&nbsp;throughout the world.<\/p>\n<p>The United Nations committee that credentials nongovernmental organizations, or&nbsp;NGOs,&nbsp;voted down an application from the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists, which advocates on behalf of reporters in some of the most&nbsp;dangerous and repressive countries.<\/p>\n<p>Among the 10 nations voting against the group were Russia, China, Cuba and Venezuela, all countries that place onerous restrictions on journalists.<\/p>\n<p>The United States, which the Committee to Protect Journalists has also criticized for government practices that restrict reporters, cast&nbsp;one of six ballots in favor of its accreditation, and three countries, including Iran, abstained.<\/p>\n<p>Accreditation gives an NGO greater access to U.N. activities and venues, providing a vital voice on behalf of civil society, dissidents, journalists and other people whose rights are infringed upon, advocates say. Without such status, the Committee to Protect Journalists said in a statement that it cannot provide &#8220;a counter-narrative to states&#8221; at U.N. bodies.<\/p>\n<p>The organization, which has&nbsp;about 40 people working on five continents, called the accreditation process &#8220;Kafkaesque.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;A small group of countries with poor press-freedom records are using bureaucratic delaying tactics to sabotage and undermine any efforts that call their own abusive policies into high relief,&#8221; said the organization&#8217;s executive director, Joel Simon, who testified before the U.N. committee this week.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The nature of what we do requires us to be highly critical of governments,&#8221; Simon said. &#8220;As a journalist, you don&#8217;t want a government to have authority over you, [forcing you] to pull your punches.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>David Kaye, the&nbsp;U.N. special rapporteur on freedom of opinion and&nbsp;expression, called the denial &#8220;a stain on the system.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., said her government was &#8220;extremely disappointed&#8221; by the vote.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;It is increasingly clear that the NGO committee acts more and more like an anti-NGO committee,&#8221; she told reporters at the U.N. in New York. That countries &#8220;try to keep an organization like CPJ&nbsp; away from the U.N., away from the accreditation that is so basic to functioning here,&nbsp;is outrageous.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>The troubles for the journalists group come at a time when independent NGOs are increasingly being outlawed, expelled or curbed in countries where they try to work. Western diplomats say one cause lies in a growing demand by civil societies&nbsp;for&nbsp;greater&nbsp;accountability from their governments, which see such activism as a threat.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;In the 21st century, these are the fault lines,&#8221; said a Western diplomat familiar with the NGO committee&#8217;s work, who requested anonymity to be able to speak candidly about internal U.N. politics. &#8220;There is an organic drive for transparency and accountability, an&nbsp;epic struggle to open closed doors.&#8221;&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Some countries don&#8217;t believe that such a thing as an independent NGO exists, and suspect they are fronts for enemy governments, nefarious causes or often&nbsp; Washington.<\/p>\n<p>The committee has also been criticized by human rights groups for frequently rejecting NGOs that work on behalf of gay rights.<\/p>\n<p>A spokesman for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon offered support for the journalists group, saying he hoped to continue working with the organization&#8217;s leadership despite Thursday&#8217;s setback. The spokesman, Farhan Haq, briefing reporters&nbsp;at the U.N., was asked whether the NGO committee was overly political. Haq responded by urging&nbsp;U.N. committees and their member states to &#8220;go about their work independently and fairly.&#8221;&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Simon&nbsp;said he hoped the U.N.&#8217;s Economic and Social Council, which has ultimate authority on the credentialing of NGOs, would override the committee&#8217;s decision. The 54-member council meets in late July.<\/p>\n<p>Also voting against the Committee to Protect Journalists were Azerbaijan, Burundi, Nicaragua, Pakistan, South Africa and&nbsp;Sudan. In favor, in addition to the U.S., were Greece, Guinea, Israel, Mauritania and Uruguay.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Countries with poor human rights records succeeded Thursday in blocking U.N.status for a well-regarded international press rights organization in what some diplomats see as a blow to free expression throughout the world.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":2713,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"topic":[],"class_list":["post-2714","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2714","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2714"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2714\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2713"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2714"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2714"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2714"},{"taxonomy":"topic","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iuhrdf.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/topic?post=2714"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}