A Data Revolution for All
Mike Froman Vice Chairman and President, Strategic Growth, Mastercard
Dr. Rajiv J. Shah President, The Rockefeller Foundation
January 28, 2020
It has now been almost two decades since the original launch of DATA.org, a non-profit that marshaled $100 billion in debt forgiveness for poor countries, and another $50 billion in contributions for health and development. In a world with more data and data-science expertise than ever, it’s time to revive that innovative spirit.

Science has revolutionized medicine and agriculture over the last 100 years, particularly for the poorest of the poor. Achievements ranging from the treatment of hookworm to the green revolution attest to its power.

Looking ahead, data science has even greater potential to revolutionize everything from how we treat disease to how we build more inclusive economies. History shows us that when the power of science and technology is brought to bear on society’s greatest challenges, millions of lives can be improved…

…Transforming the role of data in addressing major social and economic issues is not a job for any one person or organization. We must build on the successes of those who have come before. In 2002, a group of innovative social entrepreneurs, together with anti-poverty advocates and the Irish rock musician and philanthropist Bono, launched DATA.org, a nonprofit committed to alleviating debt, fighting AIDS, and reducing trade inequalities in Africa. In what ultimately became the ONE Campaign, they galvanized support for poverty alleviation by focusing on real-world data, and by advocating evidence-based approaches to development.

At the time, these efforts broke new ground by recognizing the power of data to address society’s greatest challenges. In partnership with millions of activists around the world, the coalition behind DATA.org facilitated the cancellation of $100 billion of debt owed by poor countries, marshaled $50 billion in contributions for health and development aid, and pushed for trade deals that helped millions of vulnerable families.

But, although data are ubiquitous, and the opportunities offered by the data revolution are even larger, not everyone is poised to gain from it equally. Once again, we need a bold effort to bridge the gap and ensure that the most vulnerable are not left behind.

With that challenge in mind, and with the support of DATA.org’s original founders, The Rockefeller Foundation and Mastercard are relaunching DATA.org to serve as a platform for partnerships to expand further the field of data science for social impact, and to ensure that non-profit and civic organizations are well-positioned to take advantage of the data revolution.

By relaunching the platform, we hope to use data to tackle homelessness, improve access to social benefits, and support community health workers worldwide. Those on the front lines of efforts to improve public health, fight poverty, and solve many other problems will have improved access to data scientists who can help them maximize their impact. Most importantly, this will be done in a way that brings more people and organizations together to effect positive social change, all while adhering to principles of responsible data use.

Expanding the field of data science for social impact is a shared global effort. It will take collaboration from all sectors to ensure that the nearly 2.5 quintillion bytes of data being produced every day have a positive social impact. Just as DATA demonstrated the promise of evidence-driven policies for development 18 years ago, the relaunch of the platform this month will create new momentum for tackling the world’s biggest challenges.

The data revolution must benefit all. Together, we can make 2020 the year that partnerships began to extend the promise of a data-driven economy to everyone, everywhere.

Livelihoods – Universal Basic Income

Exploring Universal Basic Income : A Guide to Navigating Concepts, Evidence, and Practices
World Bank Feb 2020
Universal basic income (UBI)—defined as a transfer that is provided universally, unconditionally, and in cash—holds an attractive promise of change across many lines. These include coverage potential, fairness in social contracts, power relations in labor markets, and gender equity, among others. It may speak, for some, to the appetite for social justice generated by glaring and growing inequalities in societies. From this standpoint, a UBI engenders interest as a societal ideal to which to aspire, and not merely a program. For others, a UBI is poised to mitigate the effects of purported massive job losses from automation, streamline the chaotic plethora of state-provided schemes, or empower people by redirecting natural resource–related revenues from public coffers to citizens.

Currently, no country has a UBI in place, although there have been (and still are) several small-scale pilots and a few larger-scale experiences. Only two countries—Mongolia and the Islamic Republic of Iran—had a national UBI in place for a short period of time. The large majority of UBI pilots are variants of targeted schemes. For example, the proposal by Felman et al. (2019) on a “quasi-universal basic rural income” for India is simply a variant of a traditional guaranteed minimum income program. There are systemwide questions—around financing, inflation, linkages to pensions, relationship to minimum wages, and the political economy—that pilots cannot fully answer.

A UBI is a program to be delivered in cash, unconditionally, and to everyone. Its design features—all in cash, no conditions, and no targeting—challenge current practices to varying degrees.

The rationale for making transfers universal rests on five main arguments. First, by not establishing eligibility criteria (besides perhaps citizenship or established residency and age, e.g., for those above age 18), universality circumvents the contentious issue of exclusion and inclusion errors that are inherent in needs-based targeting. Under a UBI, there would be no such errors, as everybody is included by design, hence achieving substantial expansions in coverage.

Second, universality may eliminate any stigma affecting beneficiaries. Third, by changing the default position of people from being potential beneficiaries (subject to eligibility verification) to guaranteed recipients, there may be fewer transaction costs involved in accessing benefits (e.g., there is no need to spend time in applying), and various economic and psychological benefits stemming from a stable source of income over time (e.g., stress reduction, empowerment, avoiding taking desperate actions out of economic hardship). Fourth, a universal transfer would be more labor compatible than most programs, as it removes the price effect of transfers (i.e., the reduction in labor supply to avoid a reduction in benefits). And finally, universality may strengthen programs’ political sustainability as beneficiaries (and voters) would draw from the entire income distribution. The case against the “U” in UBI rests principally on cost, fit for purpose, and a different appreciation of the magnitude of its possible benefits.

So where would a UBI be more or less likely to be an appropriate option? Analysis, based on both generation of new results and extensive review of the theoretical and operational literature, points to some stylized implications for different contexts.

These could be summarized as follows:
:: Where social assistance provides relatively adequate benefits, substantial coverage, and slight to marked progressivity, policymakers could consider tackling specific bottlenecks that hamper eligibility, access, coverage, or delivery within the existing system. If a UBI is to be considered, it may have to be motivated by objectives other than poverty-related ones (e.g., automation-driven job insecurity, social dividends, etc.)

:: Where coverage is high, but not progressive, a UBI could be considered an option, although some vulnerable (age) groups may suffer from the shift.

:: Where social assistance is limited but provided progressively, a UBI would extend coverage but also flatten the distribution. If budget neutral, this means “less money for more people,” and likely “less at the bottom.”

:: Where social assistance is patchy and flat or regressive, a UBI could be an option to expand coverage if financed via progressive income taxation, elimination of energy subsidies, or redistribution of windfall revenues. Most low-income countries may not display those financing features; but some middle-income, resource-rich countries may do so.

:: For a typical low-income setting, a UBI could expand coverage, but is clearly financially daunting. Other factors, such as diversity in contexts at the subnational level (e.g., remote areas with little connection to markets, etc.), may also suggest the need for design flexibility (e.g., a balance of in-kind and cash transfers, sensible ways to account for children, etc.), thus possibly making the rigid design of a UBI less palatable.

The prominence of ideological forces and different expectations suggests the need for a balanced and evidence-based approach. This report does not aim to provide strict prescriptions for or against a UBI, but instead a framework within which to think about it. The report aims to provide a compass to help navigate key issues, elucidate trade-offs, and offer new data and analysis to better inform choices around the appropriateness and feasibility of a UBI in different contexts– primarily in the context of low- and middle-income countries.

Peace, Stability, Human Rights

NGOs warn U.S. Middle East Plan risks exacerbating instability and rights violations
Palestine | 29. Jan 2020
As humanitarian, development, and religious organisations serving Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, we fear the US Middle East Plan may spark an escalation in violence and entrench violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.

We urge the international community to pursue a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in line with human rights and international law that guarantees safety for all of the region’s people.

The situation facing Palestinians is already critical. Nearly half of Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza need humanitarian assistance. More than two thirds of Gaza’s population is food insecure and 90 percent lack access to clean water through the public water network. The health system in Gaza is on the verge of collapse and unemployment levels are unsustainable yet continue to increase – especially among women and youth. Any path forward must address this urgent and stark reality.

Any move to annex territory, transfer property, restrict movement, or limit access to goods and services following the plan’s disclosure would be in violation of international law. We condemn any acts of violence emboldened by, or in reaction to, the plan or any party’s response to it.

We call on the United States to support Israelis and Palestinians by opposing violence, ensuring respect for international law, defending human rights, and continuing to support lifesaving humanitarian assistance.

Signed,
Catholic Relief Services
CARE USA
Global Communities
Islamic Relief – USA
Lutheran World Federation
Norwegian Refugee Council
Mennonite Central Committee US Washington Office
Mercy Corps
Oxfam America

Humanitarian Response – Research in Emergencies

Research in global health emergencies: our call for action
News 28 Jan 2020
Nuffield Council on Bioethics
Following a two-year international inquiry, we issued a Call for Action to research funders, governments, and others involved in health research systems for a more ethical and collaborative approach to conducting research during emergencies.

The Call for Action is as follows:
We want to maximise the contribution that scientifically robust, ethical research can make to improving the health of people affected by emergencies.

We are issuing a call for action to research funders, governments and others to:
:: Ensure that research is not supported unless the basic health needs of research participants are being addressed through the response effort. Research funders will need to work in partnerships with humanitarian organisations and ministries of health to ensure this.
:: Invest in putting community engagement mechanisms into emergency research to make them a reality. In the longer term, engagement must be a central part of local healthcare systems to ensure sustainability and preparedness.
:: Promote fair and equitable collaborations between research organisations, particularly between external research institutions and their local partners in high- and low-income settings.
:: Support emergency planning – including securing robust health and health research systems – given the vital importance of properly resourced preparedness between emergencies.

The Call for Action is supported by international research institutions and organisations including:
International Rescue Committee
The African Academy of Sciences
Wellcome
Médecins Sans Frontières UK
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
Elrha – a global humanitarian research charity
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz)
Geneva Centre for Education and Research in Humanitarian Action
University of Oxford, Medical Sciences Division

.

Research in global health emergencies
Nuffield Council on Bioethics
January 2020
PDF: https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/assets/pdfs/RGHE_full_report1.pdf
In January 2020, we published the findings of a two year in-depth inquiry into the ethical issues relating to research in global health emergencies. The inquiry was run by an international working group which gathered evidence and experience from many contributors across the globe.

Better evidence about what helps or doesn’t help during an emergency is needed in order to improve the response to global health emergencies. Research conducted during an emergency itself plays a crucial role in obtaining this evidence, and helps support the immediate response, as well as learning for the future.

The aim of the report is to identify ways in which research can be undertaken ethically during emergencies, in order to promote the contribution that ethically-conducted research can make to improving current and future emergency preparedness and response.

We have made 24 recommendations to ‘duty bearers’ such as research funders, research organisations, governments, and researchers. These are summarised in our call for action. We suggest changes that would align their policies and practices more closely to three core values of fairness, equal respect, and helping reducing suffering. The report presents these values in the form of an ‘ethical compass’ to guide the conduct of the very wide range of people involved in research in global health emergencies.
You can download the full report, short report and overview of the report in the left-hand navigation on this page. The overview is available in Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Portuguese and Spanish. You can also read the short report online.

Featured Journal Content

Science
31 January 2020 Vol 367, Issue 6477
http://www.sciencemag.org/current.dtl
Policy Forum
Progress in natural capital accounting for ecosystems
By Lars Hein, Kenneth J. Bagstad, Carl Obst, Bram Edens, Sjoerd Schenau, Gem Castillo, Francois Soulard, Claire Brown, Amanda Driver, Michael Bordt, Anton Steurer, Rocky Harris, Alejandro Caparrós
Science31 Jan 2020 : 514-515 Restricted Access
Summary
Reversing the ongoing degradation of the planet’s ecosystems requires timely and detailed monitoring of ecosystem change and uses. Yet, the System of National Accounts (SNA), first developed in response to the economic crisis of the 1930s and used by statistical offices worldwide to record economic activity (for example, production, consumption, and asset accumulation), does not make explicit either inputs from the environment to the economy or the cost of environmental degradation (1, 2). Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (EEA), part of the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA), has been developed to monitor and report on ecosystem change and use, using the same accounting approach, concepts, and classifications as the SNA (3). The EEA is part of the statistical community’s response to move SNA measurement “beyond gross domestic product (GDP).” With the first generation of ecosystem accounts now published in 24 countries, and with a push to finalize a United Nations (UN) statistical standard for ecosystem accounting by 2021, we highlight key advances, challenges, and opportunities.

Statement on the second meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)
30 January 2020 Statement
[Excerpts]
Proceedings of the meeting
…The Chair then reviewed the agenda for the meeting and introduced the presenters.

Representatives of the Ministry of Health of the People’s Republic of China reported on the current situation and the public health measures being taken. There are now 7711 confirmed and 12167 suspected cases throughout the country. Of the confirmed cases, 1370 are severe and 170 people have died. 124 people have recovered and been discharged from hospital.

The WHO Secretariat provided an overview of the situation in other countries. There are now 83 cases in 18 countries. Of these, only 7 had no history of travel in China. There has been human-to-human transmission in 3 countries outside China. One of these cases is severe and there have been no deaths…

Conclusions and advice
…The Committee also acknowledged that there are still many unknowns, cases have now been reported in five WHO regions in one month, and human-to-human transmission has occurred outside Wuhan and outside China.

The Committee believes that it is still possible to interrupt virus spread, provided that countries put in place strong measures to detect disease early, isolate and treat cases, trace contacts, and promote social distancing measures commensurate with the risk. It is important to note that as the situation continues to evolve, so will the strategic goals and measures to prevent and reduce spread of the infection. The Committee agreed that the outbreak now meets the criteria for a Public Health Emergency of International Concern and proposed the following advice to be issued as Temporary Recommendations. 

The Committee emphasized that the declaration of a PHEIC should be seen in the spirit of support and appreciation for China, its people, and the actions China has taken on the frontlines of this outbreak, with transparency, and, it is to be hoped, with success. In line with the need for global solidarity, the Committee felt that a global coordinated effort is needed to enhance preparedness in other regions of the world that may need additional support for that.

Advice to WHO
The Committee welcomed a forthcoming WHO multidisciplinary technical mission to China, including national and local experts. The mission should review and support efforts to investigate the animal source of the outbreak, the clinical spectrum of the disease and its severity, the extent of human-to-human transmission in the community and in healthcare facilities, and efforts to control the outbreak. This mission will provide information to the international community to aid in understanding the situation and its impact and enable sharing of experience and successful measures…

Measures to ensure rapid development and access to potential vaccines, diagnostics, antiviral medicines and other therapeutics for low- and middle-income countries should be developed…

WHO should continue to explore the advisability of creating an intermediate level of alert between the binary possibilities of PHEIC or no PHEIC, in a way that does not require reopening negotiations on the text of the IHR (2005).

WHO should timely review the situation with transparency and update its evidence-based recommendations.

The Committee does not recommend any travel or trade restriction based on the current information available.

The Director-General declared that the outbreak of 2019-nCoV constitutes a PHEIC and accepted the Committee’s advice and issued this advice as Temporary Recommendations under the IHR. 

[See additional announcement text here for]:
…To the People’s Republic of China
…To all countries

…To the global community
As this is a new coronavirus, and it has been previously shown that similar coronaviruses required substantial efforts to enable regular information sharing and research, the global community should continue to demonstrate solidarity and cooperation, in compliance with Article 44 of the IHR (2005), in supporting each other on the identification of the source of this new virus, its full potential for human-to-human transmission, preparedness for potential importation of cases, and research for developing necessary treatment.

Provide support to low- and middle-income countries to enable their response to this event, as well as to facilitate access to diagnostics, potential vaccines and therapeutics.

Under Article 43 of the IHR, States Parties implementing additional health measures that significantly interfere with international traffic (refusal of entry or departure of international travellers, baggage, cargo, containers, conveyances, goods, and the like, or their delay, for more than 24 hours) are obliged to send to WHO the public health rationale and justification within 48 hours of their implementation. WHO will review the justification and may request countries to reconsider their measures. WHO is required to share with other States Parties the information about measures and the justification received.

The Emergency Committee will be reconvened within three months or earlier, at the discretion of the Director-General.

::::::

Emergencies

Ebola – DRC+
Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC)

No new Situation Update identified

::::::

POLIO
Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC)
http://polioeradication.org/polio-today/polio-now/this-week/

Polio this week as of 29 January 2020
:: Want to know more about the new cVDPV2 strategy and nOPV2? have a look at the newly released fact-sheet which provides a summary of the current situation and the new tool under development.
:: With the evolving public health emergency associated with the increase in new emergences of circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2, a draft decision has been made available for consideration by the Executive board. Read more

Summary of new viruses this week (AFP cases and ES positives):
:: Afghanistan: three WPV1 positive environmental samples
:: Pakistan: six WPV1 cases, ten WPV1 positive environmental samples, four cVDPV2 cases and one cVDPV2 positive environmental sample
:: Nigeria: two cVDPV2 positive environmental samples
:: Democratic Republic of the Congo (DR Congo):  two cVDPV2 cases
:: Somalia: three cVDPV2 positive environmental samples
:: Angola: 15 cVDPV2 cases
:: Ethiopia: one cVDPV2 positive environmental sample
:: Philippines: one cVDPV1 case

::::::
::::::

Editor’s Note:
WHO has posted a refreshed emergencies page which presents an updated listing of Grade 3,2,1 emergencies as below.

WHO Grade 3 Emergencies [to 1 Feb 2020]

Democratic Republic of the Congo
:: Winning community trust in Ebola control 22 January 2020

Mozambique floods – No new digest announcements identified
Nigeria – No new digest announcements identified
Somalia – No new digest announcements identified
South Sudan – No new digest announcements identified
Syrian Arab Republic – No new digest announcements identified
Yemen – No new digest announcements identified

::::::

WHO Grade 2 Emergencies [to 1 Feb 2020]
Afghanistan – No new digest announcements identified
Angola – No new digest announcements identified
Burkina Faso [in French] – No new digest announcements identified
Burundi – No new digest announcements identified
Cameroon – No new digest announcements identified
Central African Republic – No new digest announcements identified
Ethiopia – No new digest announcements identified
HIV in Pakistan – No new digest announcements identified
Iran floods 2019 – No new digest announcements identified
Iraq – No new digest announcements identified
Libya – No new digest announcements identified
Malawi floods – No new digest announcements identified
Measles in Europe – No new digest announcements identified
MERS-CoV – No new digest announcements identified
Myanmar – No new digest announcements identified
Niger – No new digest announcements identified
occupied Palestinian territory – No new digest announcements identified
Sudan – No new digest announcements identified
Ukraine – No new digest announcements identified
Zimbabwe – No new digest announcements identified

::::::

WHO Grade 1 Emergencies [to 1 Feb 2020]

Chad – No new digest announcements identified
Djibouti – No new digest announcements identified
Kenya – No new digest announcements identified
Mali – No new digest announcements identified
Namibia – viral hepatitis – No new digest announcements identified
Tanzania – No new digest announcements identified

::::::
::::::

UN OCHA – L3 Emergencies
The UN and its humanitarian partners are currently responding to three ‘L3’ emergencies. This is the global humanitarian system’s classification for the response to the most severe, large-scale humanitarian crises. 
Syrian Arab Republic
:: Syrian Arab Republic: Recent Developments in Northwestern Syria Situation Report No. 7 – As of 29 January 2020

Yemen – No new digest announcements identified

::::::

UN OCHA – Corporate Emergencies
When the USG/ERC declares a Corporate Emergency Response, all OCHA offices, branches and sections provide their full support to response activities both at HQ and in the field.
CYCLONE IDAI and Kenneth –
:: 27 Jan 2020 East Africa’s locust crisis in numbers
:: 28 January 2020 Southern Africa Humanitarian Snapshot (January 2020)

EBOLA OUTBREAK IN THE DRC – No new digest announcements identified

::::::
::::::

The Sentinel

Human Rights Action :: Humanitarian Response :: Health :: Education :: Heritage Stewardship ::
Sustainable Development
__________________________________________________
Week ending 25 January 2020 :: Number 303

This weekly digest is intended to aggregate and distill key content from a broad spectrum of practice domains and organization types including key agencies/IGOs, NGOs, governments, academic and research institutions, consortia and collaborations, foundations, and commercial organizations. We also monitor a spectrum of peer-reviewed journals and general media channels. The Sentinel’s geographic scope is global/regional but selected country-level content is included. We recognize that this spectrum/scope yields an indicative and not an exhaustive product. Comments and suggestions should be directed to:

David R. Curry
Editor
GE2P2 Global Foundation – Governance, Evidence, Ethics, Policy, Practice
david.r.curry@ge2p2center.net

PDF: The Sentinel_ period ending 25 Jan 2020

Contents
:: Week in Review  [See selected posts just below]
:: Key Agency/IGO/Governments Watch – Selected Updates from 30+ entities   [see PDF]
:: INGO/Consortia/Joint Initiatives Watch – Media Releases, Major Initiatives, Research:: Foundation/Major Donor Watch -Selected Updates
:: Journal Watch – Key articles and abstracts from 100+ peer-reviewed journals  [see PDF]

Agriculture

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Statement on Creation of Nonprofit Agricultural Research Institute
SEATTLE, January 21, 2020 – The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is in the process of creating a new 501(c)(3) nonprofit, Bill & Melinda Gates Agricultural Innovations, LLC, which seeks to accelerate the development of innovations supported by the foundation’s Agricultural Development team. The entity, to be known as Gates Ag One, aims to speed up efforts to provide smallholder farmers in developing countries, many of whom are women, with access to the affordable tools and innovations they need to sustainably improve crop productivity and adapt to the effects of climate change.

In two of the fastest growing regions of the world—sub-Saharan Africa, home to around 1 billion people, and South Asia, with a population of about 1.8 billion—approximately 60 percent of the population lives in rural areas that typically depend on smallholder agriculture for food and income. In sub-Saharan Africa, agriculture accounts for more than half of the region’s employment, and for South Asia it contributes about 40 percent. Yields on farms in these regions are already far below what farmers elsewhere in the world achieve, and climate change will make their crops even less productive.

Gates Ag One will collaborate with a diverse community of regional and international public- and private-sector partners, as well as interested governments, to enable the advancement of resilient, yield-enhancing seeds and traits globally and facilitate the introduction of those breakthroughs into specific crops essential to smallholder farmers, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.

The goal of Gates Ag One is to help the foundation deliver on its mission to empower smallholder farmers with the affordable, high-quality tools, technologies, and resources they need to lift themselves out of poverty. The foundation is still in the early planning stages, and we look forward to sharing additional details in the future. For more information on Gates Ag One, please consult our frequently asked questions document.

Education

George Soros Launches Global Network to Transform Higher Education
Open Society Founder and Chair gifts $1 billion to newly launched Open Society University Network
January 23, 2020
DAVOS, SWITZERLAND—George Soros announced today that he is creating a new university network to better prepare students for current and future global challenges. He is endowing the network with one billion dollars ($1 billion) and asking other philanthropists to contribute.

The network, which will operate throughout the world, is named the Open Society University Network (OSUN). It will integrate teaching and research across higher education institutions worldwide. It will offer simultaneously taught network courses and joint degree programs and regularly bring students and faculty from different countries together with in-person and online discussions. The network aims to reach the students who need it the most and to promote the values of open society—including free expression and diversity of beliefs.

OSUN will seek to promote rigorous education and reach institutions in need of international partners, as well as neglected populations, such as refugees, incarcerated people, the Roma and other displaced groups. OSUN, with the help of its allies, is ready to start a massive “scholars at risk” program, merging a large number of academically excellent but politically endangered scholars into this new global network.

Already, OSUN is connecting institutions of higher learning and is holding networked courses that unite students and faculty from several universities located in different parts of the world in the classroom, sharing faculty and conducting joint research projects in which people from many universities collaborate.

Mr. Soros said: “I believe our best hope lies in access to an education that reinforces the autonomy of the individual by cultivating critical thinking and emphasizing academic freedom. I consider the Open Society University Network to be the most important and enduring project of my life and I should like to see it implemented while I am still around.”…

::::::

Open Society University Network (OSUN)
The Open Society University Network (OSUN) is a new global network that integrates learning and the advancement of knowledge across geographic and demographic boundaries, promotes civic engagement on behalf of open societies, and expands access of underserved communities to higher education.

Mission
:: Foster critical thinking, open intellectual inquiry, and fact-based research to strengthen foundations of open society amid authoritarian resurgence
:: Educate students to address tomorrow’s global challenges by getting to know other societies from the inside
:: Expand access to higher education at a time of growing inequities
:: Counteract polarization by promoting global research collaboration and educating students to examine issues from different perspectives and advance reasoned arguments
:: Bolster efforts by universities in challenging environments to build their own capacity through global partnerships to make greater contributions to their societies

Myanmar – ICC

International Court of Justice [ICJ]
APPLICATION OF THE CONVENTION ON THE PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE (THE GAMBIA v. MYANMAR)
23 January 2020
CHRONOLOGY OF THE PROCEDURE 1-13
I. PRIMA FACIE JURISDICTION 16-38
1. General introduction 16-19
2. Existence of a dispute relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the Genocide
Convention 20-31
3. The reservation of Myanmar to Article VIII of the Convention 32-36
4. Conclusion as to prima facie jurisdiction 37-38
II. QUESTION OF THE STANDING OF THE GAMBIA 39-42
III. THE RIGHTS WHOSE PROTECTION IS SOUGHT AND THE LINK BETWEEN SUCH RIGHTS AND THE
MEASURES REQUESTED 43-63
IV. RISK OF IRREPARABLE PREJUDICE AND URGENCY 64-75
V. CONCLUSION AND MEASURES TO BE ADOPTED 76-85

OPERATIVE CLAUSE 86 [p.25]
…86. For these reasons,
THE COURT,
Indicates the following provisional measures:
(1) Unanimously,
The Republic of the Union of Myanmar shall, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to the members of the Rohingya group in its territory, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular:
(a) killing members of the group;
(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to the members of the group;
(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part; and
(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(2) Unanimously,
The Republic of the Union of Myanmar shall, in relation to the members of the Rohingya group in its territory, ensure that its military, as well as any irregular armed units which may be directed or supported by it and any organizations and persons which may be subject to its control, direction or influence, do not commit any acts described in point (1) above, or of conspiracy to commit genocide, of direct and public incitement to commit genocide, of attempt to commit genocide, or of complicity in genocide;

(3) Unanimously,
The Republic of the Union of Myanmar shall take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;

(4) Unanimously,
The Republic of the Union of Myanmar shall submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this Order within four months, as from the date of this Order, and thereafter every six months, until a final decision on the case is rendered by the Court…

::::::

Press briefing note on Myanmar
Spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights: Liz Throssell
Geneva, 24 January 2020
We welcome the Order by the International Court of Justice that Myanmar must take “all measures within its power” to protect the members of the Rohingya group from all future acts that may amount to genocide under the provisions of Article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.*
The High Commissioner has repeatedly expressed serious concerns about the situation of the Rohingya following the repeated waves of violence suffered by them, most recently in 2016 and 2017. She has frequently called for the full protection of their human rights, and genuine accountability for the serious violations and abuses they have endured.
As the Secretary-General noted yesterday, these provisional measures indicated by the Court are binding under international law.
The UN Human Rights Office calls on Myanmar to immediately and unconditionally implement them in full, consistently with its obligations under the Charter and the Court’s Statute…

::::::

Financial Times, 23 Jan 2020
Opinion : Myanmar
Aung San Suu Kyi: Give Myanmar time to deliver justice on war crimes
Independent commission has documented killing of civilians and looting

This week, a comprehensive inquiry into the 2017 violence and mass displacement in the state of Rakhine presented its final report to Myanmar’s president.

The Independent Commission of Enquiry interviewed close to 1,500 witnesses, including security personnel and affected persons. It has gathered more first-hand information than any other fact-finding body in the world.

Its findings and recommendations for further domestic investigation and prosecution are unequivocal, belying those who chose to prejudge it as ineffective. The material should now be given a chance to inform both discussions on accountability for human rights violations that occurred and a road map for change in the area.

Mobilising international justice takes time and dedication. The process can too easily become attached to specific testimonies of victimisation and consequently rendered inseparable from the narrative they feed. A fair reading of the ICOE report would show that this is a real risk in the current international proceedings on events in Rakhine.

The case against Myanmar before the International Court of Justice, the statements by the prosecutor to the International Criminal Court, and the private lawsuit brought in Argentina all rely extensively on a fact-finding mission by the UN Human Rights Council. This is precariously dependent on statements by refugees in camps in Bangladesh.

The ICOE reports that some refugees may have provided inaccurate or exaggerated information. While this is understandable, we have to recognise that there is a systemic challenge. The international justice system may not yet be equipped to filter out misleading information before shadows of incrimination are cast over entire nations and governments. Human rights groups have condemned Myanmar based on unproven statements without the due process of criminal investigation.

The international condemnation has had a negative effect on Myanmar’s endeavours to bring stability and progress to Rakhine. It has undermined painstaking domestic efforts to establish co-operation between the military and the civilian government. It hampers our ability to lay the foundation for sustainable development in a very diverse country. It has presented a distorted picture of Myanmar and affected our bilateral relations. Should countries with even fewer resources than Myanmar be similarly condemned, the consequences for them could be dire.

To provide the strongest protection for human rights, we need to reform the ways in which unsubstantiated narratives are relied upon by the UN and non-governmental organisations. The voice of victims must be heard and must always touch our hearts. But it is equally important that fact-finders are vigilant in their search for truth. Recommended Myanmar Aung San Suu Kyi says war crimes ‘may have been committed’

I stated at the ICJ that there would be domestic investigations and prosecutions if the ICOE report presented further evidence of violations in Rakhine. The ICOE has done that, concluding that war crimes were committed during the internal armed conflict with the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army by members of Myanmar’s security forces and civilians. The report details killing of civilians, disproportionate use of force, looting of property, and destruction of abandoned homes of Muslims. The ICOE found no evidence of genocide.

Myanmar’s Union Attorney-general has already announced plans to investigate civilians who may have participated in looting or burning of villages. War crimes that may have been committed by members of the Defence Services will be prosecuted through our military justice system.

We need to respect the integrity of these proceedings and to refrain from unreasonable demands that Myanmar’s criminal justice system complete investigations in a third of the time routinely granted to international processes.

It is never easy for armed forces to recognise the self-interest in accountability for their members, and then follow through with actual investigations and prosecutions. This is a common challenge around the world. But that does not mean that international justice should immediately come into play.

An informed assessment of Myanmar’s ability to address the issue of violations in Rakhine can only be made if adequate time is given for domestic justice to run its course.

Justice can help us overcome distrust and fear, prejudice and hate, and end longstanding cycles of intercommunal violence. This has always been my goal. This is what we are working to achieve. International justice should not itself fall victim to the extreme polarisation which characterises discussions on the situation in Rakhine.
The writer is state counsellor of Myanmar

Inequality

World Social Report 2020: Inequality in a rapidly changing world
UN DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS
2020 :: 218 pages
PDF: http://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/01/World-Social-Report-2020-FullReport.pdf
Overview
The World Social Report 2020 examines the impact of four such megatrends on inequality: technological innovation, climate change, urbanization and international migration. Technological change can be an engine of economic growth, offering new possibilities in health care, education, communication and productivity. But it can also exacerbate wage inequality and displace workers. The accelerating winds of climate change are being unleashed around the world, but the poorest countries and groups are suffering most, especially those trying to eke out a living in rural areas. Urbanization offers unmatched opportunities, yet cities find abject poverty and opulent wealth in close proximity, making gaping and increasing levels of inequality all the more glaring. International migration allows millions of people to seek new opportunities and can help reduce global disparities, but only if it occurs under orderly and safe conditions. Whether these mega-trends are harnessed to encourage a more equitable and sustainable world, or allowed to exacerbate disparities and divisions, will largely determine the shape of our common future.

KEY MESSAGES
:: Inequality within countries is very high but it is not rising everywhere. Since 1990, income inequality has increased in most developed countries. Inequality declined in most Latin American countries from 1990 to the early 2010s but is increasing again in some of them.
:: Inequality trends differ across countries at even similar levels of development.
:: Income inequality among countries has declined in relative terms but is still higher than inequality within most countries. Absolute income differences between countries continue to grow.
:: The world is far from the goal of equal opportunity for all: circumstances beyond an individual’s control, such as gender, race, ethnicity, migrant status and, for children, the socioeconomic status of their parents, continue to affect one’s chances of succeeding in life.
:: Group-based inequalities are declining in some cases but still growing in many others. Unless progress accelerates, leaving no one behind will remain a still distant goal by 2030.
:: High or growing inequality not only harms people living in poverty and other disadvantaged groups. It affects the well-being of society at large.
:: Highly unequal societies grow more slowly than those with low inequality and are less successful at reducing poverty.
:: Without appropriate policies and institutions, inequalities in outcomes create or preserve unequal opportunities and perpetuate social divisions.
:: Rising inequality has created discontent, deepened political divides and can lead to violent conflict.

Governance

2019 Corruption Perceptions Index shows anti-corruption efforts stagnating in G7 countries
Analysis reveals corruption more pervasive in countries where money influences political power
Transparency International Secretariat
January 23, 2020 Issued by
Report: https://www.transparency.org/cpi2019

More than two-thirds of countries – along with many of the world’s most advanced economies – are stagnating or showing signs of backsliding in their anti-corruption efforts, according to the 2019 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) released today by Transparency International.

Countries in which elections and political party financing are open to undue influence from vested interests are less able to combat corruption, analysis of the results finds.

“Frustration with government corruption and lack of trust in institutions speaks to a need for greater political integrity,” said Delia Ferreira Rubio, Chair of Transparency International. “Governments must urgently address the corrupting role of big money in political party financing and the undue influence it exerts on our political systems.”

CPI highlights
The CPI ranks 180 countries and territories by their perceived levels of public sector corruption, drawing on 13 expert assessments and surveys of business executives. It uses a scale of zero (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean).

More than two-thirds of countries score below 50, with an average score of only 43. Since 2012, only 22 countries have significantly improved their scores, including Estonia, Greece and Guyana. Twenty-one have significantly declined, including Australia, Canada and Nicaragua.

Our research shows several of the most advanced economies cannot afford to be complacent if they are to keep up their anti-corruption momentum. Four G7 countries score lower than last year: Canada (-4), France (-3), the UK (-3) and the US (-2). Germany and Japan have seen no improvement, while Italy gained one point.

Corruption and political integrity
Analysis shows that countries that perform well on the CPI also have stronger enforcement of campaign finance regulations and broader range of political consultation.

Countries where campaign finance regulations are comprehensive and systematically enforced have an average score of 70 on the CPI, whereas countries where such regulations either don’t exist or are poorly enforced score an average of just 34 and 35 respectively.

Sixty per cent of the countries that significantly improved their CPI scores since 2012 also strengthened regulations around campaign donations.

“The lack of real progress against corruption in most countries is disappointing and has profound negative effects on citizens around the world,” said Patricia Moreira, Managing Director of Transparency International. “To have any chance of ending corruption and improving peoples’ lives, we must tackle the relationship between politics and big money. All citizens must be represented in decision making.”…

“Nuclear War, Climate Disaster, Multilateralism”

Doomsday Clock 2020: it is 100 seconds to midnight
23 Jan 2020
The Elders call on the world to wake up to the threats of nuclear war and climate disaster as they unveil the 2020 Doomsday Clock.
Mary Robinson, Chair of The Elders and former President of Ireland, and Ban Ki-moon, Deputy Chair of The Elders and former United Nations Secretary-General, today joined experts from the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists for the unveiling of the Doomsday Clock in Washington DC, an annual assessment of the existential risks faced by humanity.

The Clock’s hands were moved forward to 100 seconds to midnight – the closest to midnight they have been since they were first set in 1947. The decision takes into account the precarious state of nuclear arms controls, the growing threat of climate disaster, and how these can be compounded by disruptive new technologies.

“Our planet faces two concurrent existential threats: the climate crisis and nuclear weapons. We are faced by a gathering storm of extinction-level consequences, and time is running out,” Mary Robinson said…

.
Speech
To overcome existential threats, we need to re-energise multilateralism
23 Jan 2020
Unveiling the 2020 Doomsday Clock in partnership with the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Ban Ki-moon urges world leaders to focus on the clear dangers of nuclear escalation and climate emergency.
The following is a transcript of his 23 January speech

…As Mary Robinson has said, it is an honour to be here today to unveil the Doomsday Clock. But is with a solemn sense of duty, with a moral responsibility, and with a frightening sense of what is happening.

These are perilous times. The alarming rise in tensions in the Middle East threatens war, and a return to nuclear weapons development in Iran. The world waits to see how North Korea will respond to stalled negotiations over its nuclear ambitions. I am struck by the news released from North Korea that it would not be committed to previously made committments, to nuclear disarmament, and the denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula. This is surprising and very, very shocking. Also, the situation in Kashmir between nuclear-armed Pakistan and India remains unpredictable and highly dangerous.

Such tensions demand responsible global leadership, but instead over the last year we have seen precisely the opposite. We have seen the termination of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, division and uncertainty regarding the upcoming Review Conference of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and, most worryingly, the absence of any meaningful negotiations between the US and Russia to extend New START.

It would send a deeply negative message to the world if New START is allowed to expire in February 2021. This would not only eliminate remaining constraints on deployed nuclear arsenals, but also remove the monitoring and inspection capabilities which have provided both sides with increased transparency regarding nuclear capability.

On the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, The Elders believe the world must seize the opportunities presented by the review conference that begins in April. This treaty is the backbone of the multilateral consensus on nuclear arms control, and yet disagreements and frustrations between its signatories mean there is a significant risk that the conference could conclude without an agreed outcome – a scenario that would undermine the treaty and could even trigger withdrawal by member states.

Alongside the potential expiry of New START, this is a disastrous scenario for the world. It exemplifies the failures of global leadership, and the weakness of the multilateral system in the face of isolationist politics that sees diplomacy as a zero-sum game rather than a means of finding common solutions to common challenges.

At a time when world leaders should be focused on the clear and present dangers of nuclear escalation and the climate emergency, we are instead witnessing denial, disregard and dangerous brinkmanship.
The existential risks of climate change and nuclear war are increasing just as the decision-making frameworks to address them are unravelling. From the Paris Agreement to the JCPOA; despondency over the Non Proliferation Treaty to impotency at the UN Security Council – our mechanisms for collaboration are being undermined when we need them most.

To echo Mary Robinson – we must see urgent action on the climate crisis in 2020. All countries must come to COP in Glasgow in November with clear plans for delivering carbon net-zero commitments by 2050. We must see an immediate end to the investment in, and exploration of, fossil fuels. We must heed the demands of the young people on our streets and listen to the science.

We cannot negotiate with nature. We must listen to the warning of nature.

The US must somehow begin to demonstrate leadership at the federal level too. Without it, we cannot hope to meet the targets that will keep global warming to manageable levels. Without US leadership there will be no winners from this climate crisis, only losers.

In the end, we will only overcome these existential threats by working together, and to do so the world needs to re-energise multilateralism. I do believe there is an opportunity for this in the coming year.

2020 marks 75 years since the end of Second World War and the birth of the nuclear age – and, indeed, the founding of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. It also marks the 75th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations.

This is an opportunity for the world to renew its commitment to multilateralism. It is a time for world leaders to bring a new mindset to the key moments ahead of us in 2020 – to create the foundations for a just transition to a carbon net zero economy, and redouble the efforts towards a world free of nuclear weapons.

We can overcome the existential threats we face, but we must act, together, now. No country, no individual, no matter how powerful or how many resources, can do this on their own. We need to hold hands and work together.
Thank you.

Emergencies

::::::

Statement on the meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)
23 January 2020
Statement, Geneva, Switzerland
[Excerpt]
:: Human-to-human transmission is occurring and a preliminary R0 estimate of 1.4-2.5 was presented. Amplification has occurred in one health care facility. Of confirmed cases, 25% are reported to be severe. The source is still unknown (most likely an animal reservoir) and the extent of human-to-human transmission is still not clear.
:: Several members considered that it is still too early to declare a PHEIC [Public Health Emergency of International Concern], given its restrictive and binary nature.
:: The Committee stands ready to be reconvened in approximately ten days’ time, or earlier should the Director-General deem it necessary. ..

::::::

Ebola – DRC+
Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC)

Ebola Outbreak in DRC 76: 21 January 2020
Situation Update
From 13 to 19 January 2020, 15 new confirmed cases of Ebola virus disease (EVD) were reported from North Kivu Province in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The cases were reported from Beni (9 cases) and Mabalako (6 cases) Health Zones and all were linked to a confirmed case in a known chain of transmission…

::::::

POLIO
Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC)
http://polioeradication.org/polio-today/polio-now/this-week/

Polio this week as of 22 January 2020
:: The GPEI Polio Partners Group convened the eighth annual technical workshop on 6 December 2019 where a global overview of the status of poliovirus detection was presented among other polio updates. The meeting presentations are now available here.

Summary of new viruses this week (AFP cases and ES positives):
:: Afghanistan: one WPV1 case and three WPV1-positive environmental samples
:: Pakistan: two WPV1 cases, four WPV1-positive environmental samples and six cVDPV2 cases
:: Democratic Republic of the Congo (DR Congo):  ten cVDPV2 cases
:: Côte d’Ivoire: two cVDPV2 positive environmental samples
:: Ghana: two cVDPV2 positive environmental samples
:: Malaysia: two cVDPV1 cases
:: Philippines: two cVDPV2 cases and two cVDPV2 positive environmental samples
:: Togo: one cVDPV2 case

::::::

Rotary and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation extending fundraising partnership to eradicate polio
Partnership will infuse an additional US$450 million into global polio eradication effort
EVANSTON, Ill., Jan. 22, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — Rotary and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are renewing their longstanding partnership to end polio, announcing a joint commitment of up to $450 million to support the global polio eradication effort…
…In addition to the extended funding partnership with the Gates Foundation, Rotary is also announcing US$45 million in funding for polio eradication efforts in countries throughout Africa (Angola, Ethiopia, Mali, Nigeria, Somalia and South Sudan), and Asia (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Pakistan and the Philippines). The funding will help support crucial polio eradication activities such as immunization and disease detection, research, and community mobilization…

::::::
::::::

Editor’s Note:
WHO has posted a refreshed emergencies page which presents an updated listing of Grade 3,2,1 emergencies as below.

WHO Grade 3 Emergencies [to 25 Jan 2020]

Democratic Republic of the Congo
:: Ebola Outbreak in DRC 76: 21 January 2020
[See Ebola above for detail]

Mozambique floods – No new digest announcements identified
Nigeria – No new digest announcements identified
Somalia – No new digest announcements identified
South Sudan – No new digest announcements identified
Syrian Arab Republic – No new digest announcements identified
Yemen – No new digest announcements identified

::::::

WHO Grade 2 Emergencies [to 25 Jan 2020]
Angola
:: Angola honours WHO Representative at end of mission 22 January 2020

Measles in Europe
:: Strengthening response to measles outbreak in Ukraine 22-01-2020

Afghanistan – No new digest announcements identified
Burkina Faso [in French] – No new digest announcements identified
Burundi – No new digest announcements identified
Cameroon – No new digest announcements identified
Central African Republic – No new digest announcements identified
Ethiopia – No new digest announcements identified
HIV in Pakistan – No new digest announcements identified
Iran floods 2019 – No new digest announcements identified
Iraq – No new digest announcements identified
Libya – No new digest announcements identified
Malawi floods – No new digest announcements identified
MERS-CoV – No new digest announcements identified
Myanmar – No new digest announcements identified
Niger – No new digest announcements identified
occupied Palestinian territory – No new digest announcements identified
Sudan – No new digest announcements identified
Ukraine – No new digest announcements identified
Zimbabwe – No new digest announcements identified

::::::

WHO Grade 1 Emergencies [to 25 Jan 2020]

Chad – No new digest announcements identified
Djibouti – No new digest announcements identified
Kenya – No new digest announcements identified
Mali – No new digest announcements identified
Namibia – viral hepatitis – No new digest announcements identified
Tanzania – No new digest announcements identified

::::::
::::::

UN OCHA – L3 Emergencies
The UN and its humanitarian partners are currently responding to three ‘L3’ emergencies. This is the global humanitarian system’s classification for the response to the most severe, large-scale humanitarian crises. 
Syrian Arab Republic – No new digest announcements identified
Yemen – No new digest announcements identified

::::::

UN OCHA – Corporate Emergencies
When the USG/ERC declares a Corporate Emergency Response, all OCHA offices, branches and sections provide their full support to response activities both at HQ and in the field.
CYCLONE IDAI and Kenneth – No new digest announcements identified
EBOLA OUTBREAK IN THE DRC – No new digest announcements identified

::::::
::::::

The Sentinel

Human Rights Action :: Humanitarian Response :: Health :: Education :: Heritage Stewardship ::
Sustainable Development
__________________________________________________
Week ending 18 January 2020

This weekly digest is intended to aggregate and distill key content from a broad spectrum of practice domains and organization types including key agencies/IGOs, NGOs, governments, academic and research institutions, consortia and collaborations, foundations, and commercial organizations. We also monitor a spectrum of peer-reviewed journals and general media channels. The Sentinel’s geographic scope is global/regional but selected country-level content is included. We recognize that this spectrum/scope yields an indicative and not an exhaustive product. Comments and suggestions should be directed to:

David R. Curry
Editor
GE2P2 Global Foundation – Governance, Evidence, Ethics, Policy, Practice
david.r.curry@ge2p2center.net

PDF: The Sentinel_ period ending 18 Jan 2020

Contents
:: Week in Review  [See selected posts just below]
:: Key Agency/IGO/Governments Watch – Selected Updates from 30+ entities   [see PDF]
:: INGO/Consortia/Joint Initiatives Watch – Media Releases, Major Initiatives, Research:: Foundation/Major Donor Watch -Selected Updates
:: Journal Watch – Key articles and abstracts from 100+ peer-reviewed journals  [see PDF]

Conflict – “Catastrophic War”

Majority of millennials see catastrophic war as real possibility, and believe there should be limits
International Committee of the Red Cross survey asked 16,000 millennials in 16 countries their views on war.
16-01-2020 | News release
Geneva (ICRC) – Millennials see catastrophic war as a real likelihood in their lifetime. In fact, most millennials surveyed by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) believe it is more likely than not that a nuclear attack will occur in the next decade.

A survey of more than 16,000 millennials in 16 countries and territories last year – roughly half in peace, half experiencing conflict – commissioned by the ICRC explored millennials’ views on conflict, the future of warfare and the values underpinning international humanitarian law, such as the use of torture against enemy combatants.

The results indicate that millennials are nervous about the future, and heightened tensions globally are likely to deepen these fears.

A plurality of respondents, 47 percent, think it’s more likely than not that there will be a third world war in their lifetime. And although 84 percent believe the use of nuclear weapons is never acceptable, 54 percent believe it is more likely than not that a nuclear attack will occur in the next decade.

“This millennial foreboding may reflect an increase in polarization and dehumanizing rhetoric,” said ICRC President Peter Maurer. “If millennials are right about a third world war, the suffering of countries and regions will be immense. It’s a reminder of how critical it is that the laws of war that protect humanity are followed now and in the future.”

Encouragingly, 74 percent of millennials also believe that wars are avoidable, and nearly the same number (75 percent) think that limits must be imposed on how wars are fought.

However, the survey reveals worrying trends that point to a lack of respect for the basic human values enshrined in international law: 37 percent believe torture is acceptable under some circumstances – even after the UN convention banning torture is explained to them; and 15 percent believe that commanders should do whatever it takes to win, regardless of the civilian casualties generate…

Syria

“They have erased the dreams of my children”: children’s rights in the Syrian Arab Republic
“They have erased the dreams of my children”: UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria Publishes Report on Children’s Rights over the course of the Syrian War
United Nations Human Rights Council
GENEVA, 16 January 2020 – Children in the Syrian Arab Republic have been robbed of their childhood as they are forced to participate in a brutal war and endure numerous violations of their rights by all parties to the conflict while remaining acutely vulnerable to violence and abuse, the Commission of Inquiry for Syria noted today in its latest report.

In a 25-page report released today, entitled “They have erased the dreams of my children,” the three-person Commission outlines the multiple rights violations children have been subjected to – including over five million children displaced internally and abroad – and how boys and girls have been robbed of their childhood over the course of the brutal eight and a half-year war.

“I am appalled by the flagrant disregard for the laws of war and the Convention on the Rights of the Child by all parties involved in the conflict”, said Commission of Inquiry Chair Paulo Pinheiro. “While the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic has the primary responsibility for the protection of boys and girls in the country, all of the actors in this conflict must do more to protect children and preserve the country’s future generation,” he noted.

Children have been killed and maimed, and subjected to myriad violations by warring parties, states the report, which covers the period between September 2011 to the end of October 2019. On multiple occasions, pro-Government forces used cluster munitions, thermobaric bombs and chemical weapons causing scores of child casualties. Rape and sexual violence have been used repeatedly against men, women, boys and girls as a tool to punish, humiliate and instil fear among communities. Government forces have detained boys as young as 12, subjecting them to severe beatings and torture.

The devastating situation of education in Syria is particularly highlighted as an area of concern. Since the start of the conflict thousands of schools have been destroyed or used for military purposes and more than 2.1 million boys and girls are not regularly attending classes of any form. “Urgent efforts are required by the Syrian Government to support as many children as possible to return to education,” noted Commissioner Karen AbuZayd. “Armed groups holding territory also need to act with haste to facilitate access to education,” she added.

Armed groups targeted schools and used educational facilities for military purposes. Children were detained and used as bargaining chips for prisoner swaps or to extract ransom. Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) terrorists recruited and used boys to fight on the frontlines. At its peak, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) subjected girls as young as nine to rape and sexual slavery. Boys, meanwhile, were given military training and routinely exposed to extreme violence, including witnessing public executions or forced into the role of executor.

The impact of the conflict on the long-term physical and mental health of boys and girls has been severe. Today, large numbers of children suffer from disabilities as well as devastating psychological and development issues. The report also outlines how over five million children have been displaced by conflict and have become increasingly vulnerable to violations.

The Commission urges States to ensure the protection of displaced children, particularly with regard to the obligations upon all States to repatriate children with familial links to ISIL fighters. “States have well defined obligations to protect children, including from statelessness. Failing to abide by such fundamental principles would be a clear derogation of duty,” noted Commissioner Hanny Megally…

Development – Global Economy

World Economic Situation and Prospects 2020
Energy transition and the global economy
UN DESA 16 January 2020
The global economy has suffered a significant slowdown amid prolonged trade disputes and wide-ranging policy uncertainties. While a slight uptick in economic activity is forecast for 2020, the World Economic Situation and Prospects 2020 warns that economic risks remain strongly tilted to the downside, aggravated by deepening political polarization and increasing scepticism over the benefits of multilateralism. These risks could inflict severe and long-lasting damage on development prospects. They also threaten to encourage a further rise in inward-looking policies, at a point when global cooperation is paramount.

Compounding the economic slowdown, rising global temperatures and the increasing frequency and intensity of weather-related shocks press home the urgent need for a dramatic shift in the global energy mix. The World Economic Situation and Prospects 2020 explores the global economic implications of this energy transition. The transition to a cleaner energy mix will bring not only environmental and health benefits, but economic opportunities for many. However, without appropriate policy strategies, the costs and benefits will be unevenly distributed within and between countries.

“To live in shared prosperity within the capacity of our planet to support us, we must move away from carbon and resource-intensive industries, materials and value chains. We must instead prioritize sustainable consumption and production—a way of life that enables economic growth, while ensuring planetary protection.” – António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations

PDF: https://www.un.org/development/desa/dpad/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/WESP2020_FullReport.pdf

Development – Women’s Empowerment

40 Economies Make 62 Legal Reforms to Advance Women’s Economic Participation
World Bank
WASHINGTON, January 14, 2020 — The regulatory environment for women’s economic participation has improved over the past two years, with 40 economies enacting 62 reforms that will help women – half the world’s population – realize their potential and contribute to economic growth and development, says a new World Bank study. Still, the results are uneven — women in many countries have only a fraction of the legal rights of men, holding back their economic and social development.

The study, Women, Business and the Law 2020, measures 190 economies, tracking how laws affect women at different stages in their working lives and focusing on those laws applicable in the main business city. It covers reforms in eight areas that are associated with women’s economic empowerment, conducted from June 2017 to September 2019.

“Legal rights for women are both the right thing to do and good from an economic perspective. When women can move more freely, work outside the home and manage assets, they are more likely to join the workforce and help strengthen their country’s economies,” said World Bank Group President David Malpass. “We stand ready to help until every woman can move through her life without facing legal barriers to her success.”

The areas of Workplace and Marriage saw many reforms, especially in the enactment of laws that protect women from violence. In the last two years, eight economies enacted legislation on domestic violence for the first time. Seven economies now have new legal protections against sexual harassment in employment.

Twelve economies improved their laws in the area of Pay, removing restrictions on the industries, jobs and hours that women can work. Globally, the most frequent reforms were in areas related to Parenthood, with 16 economies enacting positive changes. Reforms included expansion of the amount of paid maternity leave available to mothers, introduction of paid paternity leave and prohibition of dismissal of pregnant employees.

Achieving legal gender equality requires strong political will and a concerted effort by governments, civil society, and international organizations, among others. But legal and regulatory reforms can serve as an important catalyst to improve the lives of women as well as their families and communities.
“This study helps us understand where laws facilitate or hinder women’s economic participation. It has incentivized countries to undertake reforms that can eliminate gender imbalances,” said World Bank Group Chief Economist Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg. “Achieving equality will take time, but it is encouraging that all regions have improved. We hope that this research will continue to serve as an important tool to inform policy making and level the playing field for women.”

The WBL index measures only formal laws and the regulations which govern a woman’s ability to work or own businesses– a country’s actual norms and practices are not captured. The global average score was 75.2, which improved slightly from 73.9 two years ago. Clearly, much more work remains as women in many countries have only a fraction of the legal rights of men, holding them back from opportunities for employment and entrepreneurship…