HRHF statement on the adoption of Russia’s UPR

Human Rights House Foundation delivered the following statement during the adoption of Russia’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC39). This statement enjoys the support of two Russian human rights organisations.

During Russia’s Previous review in 2013, its restrictive legislation on freedom of assembly and association was heavily criticized. This legislation has subsequently demonstrated its destructive potential, illustrated in our joint written submission under the UPR.

Since its second review, Russia has received numerous authoritative international assessments of its legislation, echoing the criticism it received in its review under the UPR, including those by the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, the Venice Commission, UN treaty bodies and special procedures.

Nevertheless, Russia continues to deny that these legal provisions are in violation of international standards and takes no steps to remedy the situation. In fact, Russia continues to introduce new restrictive norms, including inter alia, the law on “undesirable organizations”, thus widening the toolbox for suppressing independent civil society. Such examples include:

  • 2014 legislation on public rallies, further limiting the freedom of peaceful assembly, with contraventions resulting in fines of up to one million roubles, and up to five years in prison;
  • A policy by the Ministry of Justice, since 2016, to press the courts to dissolve NGOs included on the “foreign agents” register but unable or unwilling to comply with the additional reporting requirements or severe fines levelled against them.

Along with the criminal prosecutions of individuals for the peaceful exercise of their fundamental freedoms, these have all had a further chilling effect on civil society.

Now under its third periodic review, and as with its second review, Russia continues to refuse to accept any specific recommendations on amending or repealing these laws. Russia does this while accepting more vague and unspecific recommendations, such as “creating a safe and enabling environment for civil society and human rights defenders”.

It should be clear to all delegations that it is impossible to implement these kinds of recommendations without first removing existing repressive legislation on freedom of association and assembly. So, by not accepting these recommendations Russia sends a clear signal that it is not willing to do anything to meet its international obligations on freedom of association and assembly and the protection of human rights defenders.

Mr Chairperson, we ask the Russian Federation to:

  1. Repeal the provisions on “foreign agents” NGOs and repeal the law on “undesirable organizations”;
  2. Stop arbitrary detentions and criminal prosecution of participants of peaceful protests and repeal restrictive legislation in relation to peaceful assembly.

Thank you.

 

This statement also enjoys the support of the following organisations:

  • OVD-Info
  • Youth Human Rights Movement

Latest

May 10, 2019

International Civil Society Week in Belgrade

International Civil Society Week 2019 (ICSW) was held in Belgrade from 8-12 April 2019. Events were co-organised by Civic Initiatives (member of Human Rights House Belgrade), CIVICUS: Civic Alliance for Citizen Participation, and Balkan Civil Society Development Network.

May 10, 2019

“If you can smile in the most difficult situations, you are not yet defeated”

A key contributor to creating a human rights community in Belarus, Tatsiana Reviaka was one of the country’s first human rights defenders when she began her work in the newly-independent Belarus. Reviaka was the president of Barys Zvozskau Belarusian Human Rights House between 2010 and 2018.

May 10, 2019

Marking 10 Years of the Anti-Discrimination Act in Croatia

Marking the anniversary of the adoption of the main legal instrument to fight discrimination in Croatia, Human Rights House Zagreb held an international conference in cooperation with the Office of the Ombudswoman.