The committee that monitors the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW or the Women's Convention), has two new feminist experts from the international women's movement, Shanti Dariam and Silvia Pimentel. For women of the world this historic success will positively impact the committee's work and the advancement of women's human rights. This article analyzes the committee's work, its political impact, the implications and challenges of the process and the results of the recent elections, especially in relation to the roles played by governments and the international women's movement.

What is the CEDAW Committee?

Under the United Nations system six committees were created to supervise the implementation of the principle human rights treaties. In the established mechanism, State Parties to these treaties present country reports that outline their compliance with their obligations and based on these reports, the committee dialogues with the States to help them meet their contracted obligations. The committee then makes suggestions and recommendations to guide States in their implementation of treaties.

The CEDAW Committee, the committee that monitors the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in resolution 34/180 in December 1979. In accordance with article 18 of the Women's Convention, the committee was created to monitor the application of CEDAW provisions by ratified countries. With the approval of the Optional Protocol¹ to CEDAW in December 2000, the committee's function broadened. Currently, it receives petitions or complaints presented by individuals or groups of people who allege that their rights under the convention have been violated and it can initiate investigations of grave or systematic violations of women's human rights.

The Committee's Election Process

The committee is comprised of 23 experts whose terms last four years. Half of the committee members are replaced every two years through election. Their positions are privately held and they are not delegates or representatives of their countries of origin, although they may be proposed and politically promoted by these.

Three months prior to each election the United Nations Secretary General gives States Parties notice to present their nominations (as per Article 17 of CEDAW). The election of nominees who, in theory, are competent on the convention, is held by secret ballot. Each country has one vote and the individuals who receive the majority of votes from the countries present on the election day are elected.

Although there are other feminist experts on the Committee, the selection by Assembly of States Parties of two well-known feminists² supported by the international women's movement is a first. The women's movement(s) direct participation in the campaigning is also new.

The outcome of the elections was, generally, positive. Still, the process of electing nominees raises two concerns: first, the lack of coherence in the election process within the United Nations and second, the real impact the women's movement can or cannot have on this type of process.

Alda Facio,³ a Latin American feminist and candidate, asked, "How can the elections to a committee of independent experts depend on how many votes countries are willing to exchange? The feminists who are already older members of CEDAW are not there thanks to the direct support of the movement but rather because their countries supported them by exchanging votes. That is to say, when a country asks another country to vote for its candidate, the former must promise the latter that it will vote for its candidate in other elections or in the same elections. This form of electing experts to the committees has become so normalized that no one questions the ethics of it. It is so entrenched that some countries told me straight out that they could not vote for me because Costa Rica had not offered them anything in return!!! And they were not embarrassed to say it!! To them this is how politics work. My candidacy showed me how corrupt the process is."

These systems are clearly inconsistent. On the one hand, the mechanisms that supervise countries' compliance with treaties are not subject to political interference by governments; and independent experts cannot represent government. Yet, the same governments are asked to present nominations and de facto lobby via for vote exchanges; a process which generally threatens to mirror the broader geopolitical interests of states, and the transparency of the process.

Silvia Pimentel⁴ confirms this role for governments, "[t]he elections represent a very complex and difficult effort. In the larger political game of world power, the most decisive factor is which country presents the candidacy because the countries make agreements and 'negotiate' between themselves and the profile of the candidate for the committee is not exclusively considered." Shanti Dariam⁵ agrees: "[i]t does not matter how good or capable a candidate may be, everything depends on the lobbying efforts of the government mission in New York. As in any other election, the more exposure, the greater are your chances and only your government can do this." The governments' support and lobbying is so influential that candidate Facio, in spite of the support of the women's movement and her recognized expertise, discovered that "some of the delegates went around saying to delegates from other missions that Costa Rica didn't care if I won."⁶

Alda added, "Although many many women around the world signed a petition in support of my election or spoke with their respective ministries, which affected the votes I received, there were many who did not realize they could affect the outcome of the elections. Many have written to me that they did not do enough or that they did it too late. I believe that we do not have, as a movement, much experience in these types of elections because in reality there has never been a movement to ask support for CEDAW elections. It has always been done between governments."⁷

Some women's human rights activists have experience lobbying UN conferences. Still, less women lobby the range of UN systems, either because they lack the time or experience and because they perceive their efforts futile.

These thoughts pose various challenges for the women's movement and for the United Nations system itself. Within the movement, discussion and decisions on when and how to participate in the United Nations processes are necessary. Do we support and lobby for feminist candidacies for key positions? How can e have greater political influence in conferences and international processes? How do we demand ethical policies and transparent processes in the United Nations system?

Moreover, this "vote exchange" pervades the negotiation of documents and UN texts as well. Legislation loses its initial content and intention through the exchange of self-centered interests between political parties. Given how this mechanism of corruption has been globally established and normalized we must demand ethical and transparent methods of negotiation from governments, both nationally and internationally.

Alternatives might prove equally as challenging given that governments would then negotiate based on technical and/or objective criteria and instead of political, military and economic interests.

The Committee's Work

States Parties to CEDAW present periodic reports to the committee; one year after the convention enters into force and every four years thereafter, or at the committee's request. The reports must describe the legislative, judicial and administrative measures taken to effectuate the provisions of the convention, as well as the obstacles encountered in implementation. The committee can also invite United Nations specialized bodies and non-governmental organizations to send supplementary reports.

In accordance with article 19 of CEDAW, the committee procedures establish, among other things, that meetings shall generally be public, that there shall be a quorum with 12 experts, that decisions shall be made with two thirds of the members, as well as the method of operation in sub-groups.

The committee meets in New York for three weeks to review reports in January and June. Prior to the meetings, a group of five experts meets to debate the reports and prepare questions for the countries. Before each session, the committee creates a list of countries that will be called to present their report. The reports are reviewed as they are received, but the committee tries to maintain a geographic balance and a balance between initial and periodic reports.

During the presentation of the report, a dialogue is established between the committee of experts and State representatives; the latter are questioned on the report if the committee needs clarification or further information on any of the issues presented. At the end of the exchange, the committee draws up concluding observations or comments and general recommendations for the different countries. The concluding observations emphasize the achievements, challenges and obstacles that the countries face in implementing the convention and suggest actions for the future, especially in areas it considers worrisome. Additionally, it invites the State Parties to address these observations in their next report. The general recommendations, on the other hand, attempt to support the States Parties in interpreting the articles of the convention. In these recommendations, the committee addresses issues that the convention does not explicitly mention.

Currently there are 25 recommendations. The recommendations from the first ten years of the committee refer more to the content of the reports and to reservations to the convention. In 1991, more attention was given to specific norms and the relation between them on key issues. Currently, the recommendations are a guide to applying the convention in specific situations.

In July 1997, the committee established the practice of meeting with NGOs from countries that are presenting reports to hear their concerns and collect alternative information in what are called shadow reports. This initiative began when IWRAW Asia Pacific implemented the "Global to Local" program, directed by Shanti Dariam, which has facilitated dialogue between the committee and hundreds of NGOs from more than 100 countries.

Silvia Pimentel was also involved with IWRAW from 1986 to 1995. She says, "IWRAW was the first international NGO dedicated to monitoring the committee's work from the perspective of the women's movement. IWRAW devised and created the strategy of shadow reports to support and serve as critical reference for the committee's analysis of the official reports."⁸

Shadow reports are written by NGOs from different countries to provide the committee with information and statistics collected by civil society because governments often do not precisely represent the situation of women and exaggerate achievements. This type of non-official report serves as a mechanism for creating accountability so that countries create public policies in accordance with women's vision, interests and needs. Additionally, shadow reports are not only used to expose the status of women to the committee, but can also be used as a basis for a common agenda among different groups of women to conduct national follow-up to the recommendations made by the committee to the government.

According to Shanti Dariam,⁹ "The dialogue's effectiveness is influenced by the effectiveness of the NGO's participation. I have observed how not only the CEDAW Committee, but also the review process itself, have benefited from women's participation. Thanks to the information provided by NGOs, the committee has been more precise in its evaluations of official reports and has become more conscious of its responsibility to women. Likewise, the State Parties see women as critical constituents capable of revealing incoherencies in their governments if they do not assume their commitments to women in a serious way."

This opening up of space for debate between the committee and NGOs has been so effective that in July of this year the committee opened for discussion a general recommendation to implement article 2 and receive proposals to ensure women's reproductive rights and their protection during armed conflicts.

Finally, the committee has adopted some guidelines to help countries prepare their reports. According to the guidelines, the initial report on the status of women in the country must be very detailed and comprehensive because progress will be measured from this first description. The committee expects that the follow-up reports continue to update the first report so that it can verify that over the four years there have been significant changes and can better assess what to recommend for future action.

The Committee's Political and Practical Impact

Since its beginning, the CEDAW Committee has been politically and practically impacted by a series of limitations. For example, the committee has few resources, brief sessions and countries continue to make open or subtle reservations to CEDAW provisions or derogatory comments about the committee's. These then effect the committee's ability to effectively monitor or follow-up on recommendations, and on the governments' commitment in applying the convention. Added to this, the committee's new power in relation to the Optional Protocol, requires more time and human and economic resources.

Gender indicators are not sufficient measures of the actions adopted by a State Party or the impact on these on the lives of women. An analysis of the country's political, economic and social development and programs in light of its economic policies are essential. It would then be easier to measure committee's real political impact on each of the ratifying countries. The Committee has collected examples of best practices in different countries' use of CEDAW.¹⁰

While, the committee may have gained respect and political space within the UN systems, with governments and with women's organizations, the committee still cannot enforce recommendations through legal sanctions. Countries with conservative governments can then ignore their obligations and even seek ways to devalue the committee's work. Moreover, women's rights are still not a priority for many governments. For example, governments have not used economic embargos on another to penalize a state that is violating women's human rights.

The committee's general recommendations are also limited because they are not directed at individual States, but at all States Parties; this makes monitoring them increasingly difficult. Suggestions, directed at individual countries, and general recommendations are not legally binding. This makes it increasingly important that NGO shadow reports are broadly disseminated to create debate and make State obligations apparent to the general public.

The committee cannot exercise direct pressure on a country, that is, it cannot legally sanction a country for violating the convention. It can note a country's failures in implementation through commentaries or recommendations via the procedures included in the Optional Protocol. For the general recommendations and observations to be translated into policies, programs or laws according to the provisions of the convention, systematic work on accountability and sensitization by national women's movements is necessary, but these movements also face fundamentalist forces.

To develop an effective monitoring system, women's civil society organizations can support the CEDAW Committee by pressuring and influencing their respective governments and by creating and seriously conducting follow-up to their shadow reports and the committee's recommendations.

The committee's impact and work is also influenced by its composition and vision. That more feminist women are becoming members will ultimately influence the committee's analysis and perspective. According to Silvia Pimentel,¹¹ "It cannot be said that the committee practices a feminist vision. Therefore, it would be an advance to increase the presence of feminists on the committee. The members' profiles are diverse, but many do not have political experience nor have been affiliated with the women's movement, and for this reason, although prepared and trained intellectually, they often do not have the understanding to grasp the complexity and economic, social, cultural, political and legal contradictions that women throughout the world experience."

On the other hand, Shanti Dariam¹² argues that given that "the committee establishes standards for women's human rights using the framework of the convention with emphasis on substantive equality means that it is implementing a feminist vision." She also adds, "[i]t is fundamental that women participate actively in strengthening the committee's work because their experiences allow the committee to move from the abstract text to interpreting the States Parties' obligations in the context of concrete manifestations of inequality."

Alda Facio¹³ agrees: "[t]he committee is very eclectic because there are many women experts and one male expert who are really experts in women's human rights, which makes them feminists. While there are others that are there because their countries supported them in the exchange of votes and they really do not know much about eliminating discrimination against women and less about the subtle ways patriarchy oppresses us. However, the majority really is committed and does a good job; I would say they do feminist work."

Whether the committee's vision is feminist or not is a polemical issue and discussion should be based on an exhaustive study of its years of practical and written work. Some feminists contend that the committee should be more progressive on sexual and reproductive rights. In addition to general comments on the right to health, the committee noted that women who have abortions should not be punished. At the same time, these and other actions by the committee have been used by right wing groups and governments that oppose CEDAW and its Optional Protocol, to categorize the treaty as a radical feminist document that violates countries' sovereignty, promotes abortions, interferes with the concept of family, and promotes the legalization of prostitution (US government and other governments and fundamentalist religious groups have said at various times).

Countries like Rwanda, Costa Rica and Ireland criminalize abortion and have ratified CEDAW. Whereas the U.S., which has not ratified CEDAW, pressures the committee insisting that CEDAW must state that it does not promote abortion. The fact that this body has recommended decriminalization in countries like China, where prostitution and trafficking in women and girls is very serious, demonstrates a practice and vision consistent with women's human rights. However, the U.S. has used this type of argument to reduce the effectiveness of the committee's work and to justify the lack of economic support for family planning programs.

Diverse excuses made by governments affect the committee's impact. For example, countries have claimed cultural or religious tradition as a way of evading compliance with the convention, in spite of the fact that CEDAW establishes that each country's domestic legislation is not a reason for non compliance with the treaty. Similarly, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in article 27 states that a State Party may not invoke its internal law as justification for its failure to implement a treaty. This assumes that legislation must be made consistent with the treaty and that the country has an obligation to create legislation consistent with CEDAW in the absence of such legislation.

Governments must guarantee that the international human rights instruments they ratify serve as a legal basis in national courts. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, for example, emphasizes the importance of people defending their rights before national courts. Still, in order for this to occur, the national legal system must be strengthened through the incorporation of international standards. The Optional Protocol is one instrument that can strengthen this process.

For its part, the women's movement must pressure their governments to ensure more than national women's mechanisms are obligated to implement CEDAW. Rather all government bodies (in the executive, legislative and judicial branches) must be in compliance as the government must account for the actions or omissions of all its agencies, as established in article 2 d) of the convention.

The reelection of the Bush government will have a great impact on compliance with and the advance of women's human rights. Still while the North continues to move towards the right, some countries in Latin America seem to be moving to the left, which could open doors at the national level to demand real compliance with a women's bill of rights. It is important that the movement take advantage of the political and economic alliances that countries like Brasil, Argentina, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Cuba are creating among themselves and with countries in Asia and Africa, so that CEDAW principles mainstream the social, economic and cultural policies in each country.

Bibliography

Amnesty International. "Ratify the Women's Human Rights Treaty." Amnesty International. Aug. 14, 2004.
http://www.amnestyusa.org/cedaw/cedawhow.html

Human Rights Watch. "CEDAW: The Women's Treaty." Human Rights Watch. Aug. 20, 2004.
http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/cedaw/

International Women's Rights Action Watch. "Day of General Discussion on the Proposed General Recommendation on Article 2 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women." Background Paper. 31st CEDAW Session. IWRAW. July 21, 2004. Aug. 15, 2004.

IWRAW-AP. Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women 664th Meeting (AM). "WOMEN'S ANTI-DISCRIMINATION COMMITTEE OPENS DISCUSSION ON STRENGTHENING 'LEGAL BACKBONE' OF WOMEN'S CONVENTION WITH GENERAL RECOMMENDATION ON IMPLEMENTATION." Civil Society, UN Agencies Weigh in with Proposals To Ensure Women's Reproductive Rights, Protection in Armed Conflict. Press Release. WOM/1461. July 21, 2004.
http://www.iwraw-ap.org/press_gr26.htm

IWRAW Asia Pacific. Home page. Aug. 18, 2004.
http://www.iwraw-ap.org/committee/election.htm

IWRAW Asia Pacific and UNIFEM. "Consultation on Art. 2 during the Global to Local Orientation." July 10, 2004. New York, New York.

United Nations. "General Recommendations." Women Watch. Aug. 16, 2004.
http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/recommendations/index.html

United Nations. "Rules of Procedure of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women." Women Watch. Aug. 16, 2004.
http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/reports/cedawreport-a5638-RulesOfProcedure.htm

United Nations. "Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women" Centro de Información, México, Cuba y República Dominicana, CINU (Information Center, Mexico, Cuba and the Dominican Republic). Aug. 17, 2004.
http://www.cinu.org.mx/temas/mujer/cedaw.htm

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. "Discrimination against Women: The Convention and the Committee." Fact Sheet No. 22. Aug. 14, 2004.
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu6/2/fs22.htm

UNDP. "Examples of how women have used CEDAW to change constitutions and national laws and influence court decisions in their countries." UNIFEM. Aug. 15, 2004.
http://www.unifem.undp.org/cedaw/indexen.htm

United Nations. "Compilation of Guidelines on the Form and Content of Reports to be submitted by States Parties to the International Human Rights Treaties." Women Watch. Aug. 15, 2004.
http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/reporting.htm

United Nations. Division for the Advancement of Women. Home page. Aug. 16, 2004.
http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/committee.htm

United Nations. Human Rights Committee. General Comment No. 31: The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant. 2004.
http://www.cedim.uqam.ca/publications/GeneralComments31.htm

Links

IWRAW Asia Pacific
http://www.iwraw-ap.org/aboutus.htm

This NGO contributes to the progressive interpretation, universalization, implementation and realization of women's human rights through the lens of CEDAW and other international human rights treaties. They promote the application of international human rights standards through the use of CEDAW at the national level and train NGOs on the different elements of the concepts of equality, non discrimination, state obligation, and the principles of universality and indivisibility.

Comité de América Latina y el Caribe para la Defensa de los Derechos de la Mujer - CLADEM (Latin American and Caribbean Committee for the Defense of Women's Rights)
http://www.eurosur.org/CLADEM/

CLADEM is a network of women and women's organizations throughout Latin America and the Caribbean working towards an effective defense of women's rights. They form a network that speaks to organizations and individuals committed to advocating for women's rights through different activities: creating legislative proposals, researching, training, litigating, teaching in universities, informing, communicating, and performing actions in solidarity.

Instituto Social y Político de la Mujer (Social and Political Institute for Women)
http://www.ispm.org.ar/

This organization started as the initiative of a group of women with experience working in different social, academic and political spheres with the goal of making actions to change women's status more effective, and therefore modifying the public's behavior as a whole.

Centro de la Mujer Peruana Flora Tristán (Flora Tristán Peruvian Woman's Center)
http://www.flora.org.pe/

A feminist organization whose mission is to fight the structural causes that restrict women's full citizenship. It attempts to broaden women's citizenship and also development policies and processes so that they respond to criteria and standards for equity and gender justice.

Control Ciudadano (Citizen Control)
http://www.socwatch.org.uy/es/acercaDe/index.htm

An international network of citizen organizations fighting for the eradication of poverty and its causes with the goal of ensuring equitable distribution of riches and realizing human rights. They are committed to social, economic and gender justice. Control Ciudadano demands an accounting from governments, the UN system and international organizations on compliance with national, regional and international commitments on the eradication of poverty.

Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW)
http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/

The Division for the Advancement of Women advocates for the improvement of the status of women throughout the world through equality between women and men so that both can participate in sustainable development, peace and security, governance and human rights. It also works to mainstream gender perspectives both within and outside the United Nations system by conducting research, strengthening communication between governments and civil society, promoting international standards and best practices, supporting implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action, providing servicing to the Commission on the Status of Women in the creation of global policies and providing substantive and technical servicing to the CEDAW Committee.

Women Watch
http://www.un.org/womenwatch/

WomenWatch is a gateway to information and resources on the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women through the United Nations system. In addition to supporting the Beijing Platform for Action, its mandate has expanded to supporting the outcome document of the twenty-third special session of the General Assembly in June 2000 and Security Council resolution 1325 of October 2000.

Center for Reproductive Rights
http://www.reproductiverights.org/esp_publications.html

Is an NGO dedicated to promoting the equality of women throughout the world, guaranteeing their reproductive rights as human rights. Reproductive rights, the foundation for women's self-determination over their bodies and sexual lives, are critical for women to reach their maximum potential. They believe it is fundamental to have laws and policies that advance and protect these rights.

New Issues

Amnesty International and the Working Group on Ratification
"Human Rights for All: CEDAW, Working for Women Around the World and At Home"
Amnesty International
Nov. 14, 2004
http://www.amnestyusa.org/cedaw/

A publication of the Working Group on Ratification for CEDAW, a coalition of organizations to which Amnesty International belongs. It was designed for use within Congress as well as for grassroots organizing.

Alda Facio
"Cómo Hacer Informes Paralelos a la CEDAW" (How to Create Parallel Reports to CEDAW)
ILANUD and UNIFEM
2004
http://www.ilanud.or.cr/justiciagenero/CEDAW.pdf

This publication was created within the framework of the world campaign coordinated by IWRAW Asia Pacific, "Our Rights are Not Optional" and whose coordinator for Spanish-speaking Latin America is the Fundación Justicia y Género (Justice and Gender Foundation). The campaign attempts to use the movement for the ratification of the Optional Protocol to renew interest in CEDAW (the Women's Convention). The book attempts to be an instrument to support women and NGOs that want to present parallel or shadow reports to the CEDAW Committee.

Take Action

Plataforma del Movimiento Argentino de Mujeres y de Derechos Humanos por la Ratificación del Protocolo Facultativo de la Convención sobre la Eliminación de Todas las Formas de Discriminación Contra la Mujer (CEDAW) (Argentine Women's and Human Rights Movement Platform for the Ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women - CEDAW)
http://www.rimaweb.com.ar/derechos/cedaw_ya.html

The Argentine Women's Information Network, with the support of the Inter-American Institute of Human Rights (IIHR), campaigns for Argentina to ratify the Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) as well as to disseminate and raise public awareness of these instruments.

Cedaw4change
http://list.iwraw-ap.org/lists/info/cedaw4change

An online discussion forum aimed at disseminating information for women's equality. Its primary focus is the implementation of CEDAW and its Optional Protocol, as well as to facilitate organizations' capacity to access rights through CEDAW and other international human rights treaties. The list is moderated by International Women's Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific (IWRAW Asia Pacific - www.iwraw-ap.org).

Sources

¹For information on the procedures of the Optional Protocol, see Sullivan, Donna. "El Protocolo Facultativo de la CEDAW y su aplicabilidad en el terreno." (The Optional Protocol to CEDAW and its Applicability on the Ground) Whrnet. January 2004.
http://www.whrnet.org/docs/tema-cedaw-0401.html

²For this article, three well-known feminists who were candidates in the election of experts to the CEDAW Committee were interviewed. They are: Shanti Dariam, Alda Facio and Silvia Pimentel. Their statements on their experiences in the process appear at the end of the text.

³Alda Facio. Written interview. 8/22/04. Page 2. San José, Costa Rica.

⁴Silvia Pimentel. Written interview. 10/5/04. Page 3. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.

⁵Shanti Dariam. Written interview. 10/5/04. Page 2. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

⁶Alda Facio. Written interview. 8/22/04. Page 1. San José, Costa Rica.

⁷Alda Facio. Written interview. 8/22/04. Page 2. San José, Costa Rica.

⁸Silvia Pimentel. Written interview. 10/5/04. Page 2. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.

⁹Shanti Dariam. Written interview. 10/5/04. Page 1. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

¹⁰See UNIFEM web site http://www.unifem.org/index.php?f_page_pid=160

¹¹Silvia Pimentel. Written interview. 10/5/04. Page 2. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.

¹²Shanti Dariam. Written interview. 10/5/04. Page 2. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

¹³Alda Facio. Written interview. 8/22/04. Page 3. San José, Costa Rica.