In anticipation of the shifts in the operation and correspondence in the multilateral system governing member-states of the United Nations, members and partner organizations of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances regrouped for a lobby training session at the Development Academy of the Philippines, Tagaytay, on 6-8 May 2006. Delegates from IKOHI (Indonesia), KontraS (Indonesia), OPFMD (Sri Lanka), TJC (Pakistan), FIND (Philippines), APDP (Kashmir), Non-Violence International (Thailand), We Remember (Belarus), FEDEFAM (Latin America), and Linking Solidarity (The Netherlands), together with trainer and lawyer Cecilia Jimenez from Geneva, Switzerland, reviewed and evaluated the accomplishments over the past years. They assessed the current situation and discussed possible lobbying strategies to meet the goal of having the Convention adopted by the UN Human Rights Council (HRC). And they set immediate objectives in preparation for the June session.

Jimenez highlighted three components of the "strategy circle" that must be considered in planning the lobby activities. She stressed the importance of (1) knowing one’s self [or the organization/Federation], (2) knowing the targets, and (3) knowing the terrain.

She said that it is imperative to recognize the importance and the contribution of each constituent. Families, for whom the Convention is mainly for, provide the strongest impact. Needless to say, they belong at the forefront of the campaign.

Furthermore, understanding and defining the identity of each of these members and partners are also vital in addressing the team’s internal dynamics. To launch activities upon uneven grounds can cause strain to the coordination of the group and more importantly, to its social cohesion.

Secondly, targets need to be identified. It will provide direction to every activity planned. More, it will help maximize resources effectively. Thus, states were mapped out into committed, non-committed and opposed categories. Focus must be on countries that still need much convincing regarding the importance of the treaty to the families’ lives and the peoples’ protection, in general.

Last, it is crucial to study the playing field of all actors in the bid for the Convention’s adoption. Players need to observe and track the changes in the UN. The group painted the possible scenarios that could happen to equip themselves with enough plans and strategies to handle the actual decisions of the UN body later on.

However, the UN is not the only playing field. Governments in their respective countries are key players as well. Farooq Niazi of the Truth and Justice Commission rightly pointed out the need to lobby and campaign in one’s own country as no international force can just change the attitude of an administration that is against the Convention. Indeed, even if the General Assembly adopts the drafted text, its implementation relies heavily upon the government which would ratify it.

AFAD Secretary General Aileen Bacalso hoped to have more concrete actions in the national level to convince the governments to support the Convention and propel them to start the process of enacting national laws criminalizing enforced disappearances.

Jimenez further warned that the group must also ensure that states which would ratify must be evenly distributed among the regions. She said that when more states from Latin America or Europe, for example, ratify the Convention, other states tend to refuse to sign it for the reason that "it is only a Latin American problem" or "it is a European thing." Polarization of ratifications to a region can negate the principle of universality and leave the Convention useless to countries which need it the most.

Speakers who graced the event were Hon. Loretta Anne Rosales of the Akbayan partylist and former chair of the Committee on Human Rights, Cecilia Jimenez, Maria Adela Antokoletz of FEDEFAM, Irina Krasovskaya of We Remember-Belarus, and Suciwati, wife of the late AFAD Chairperson, Munir.

Antokoletz discussed two reasons of enforced disappearances in America but may nonetheless apply in other countries. Under the international context, she placed much responsibility for this act upon US imperialism and its global campaign against terrorism. US, she said, began a world campaign of domination upon countries that produce oil and other energetic and wealthy resources. More, its crusade against terrorists cultivated an environment of enforced disappearances, torture, extrajudicial killings, etc.

In the local context based on Latin America’s experience, "dictatorships have taught ways of living, formed ways of thinking, deepened authoritarian trends and created conditions to strongly install a new-liberal savage economic system." She shared that the consequences of a dictatorship endure more in time than the dictators themselves. "We in Latin America have to work against those consequences for several generations," she stressed.

With all these at hand, Krasovskaya called on everyone’s support as "only our joint activities can raise the problem of involuntary disappearances to the level which will enable us to get closer to learning the truth about our loved ones and restore justice and rule of law."

These efforts indeed helped bring the people another step closer to truth and justice. In June 2006, strategies paid off when by consensus, members of the HRC approved the adoption of the Convention. (See related story.)

Euphoria again followed the session of the HRC. The question is, however, will this jubilation be sustained by the General Assembly come November 2006? Or will it be cut again?

For now though, everyone is basking in the glory of a renewed hope and spirit. And whatever may come in the succeeding months, these human rights organizations are prepared to pursue truth and justice in the name of all those who disappeared and their families. Whatever happens, this fight shall go on.

1. Conduct promotion of HRE, advisory services, technical assistance and capacity building with the consent of Member States concerned;

2. Serve as a forum for dialogue and thematic issues;

3. Make recommendations to the GA with respect to international HR law (standard-setting);

4. Promote full implementation of HR obligations and follow-up of the goals from the UN conferences and summits;

5. Undertake a periodic review based on objective and reliable information;

6. Prevent human rights violations and respond promptly to human rights emergencies; and

7. Assume the roles and responsibilities of the Commission on Human Rights relating to the work of the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights.

Nevertheless, this decision to abolish the Commission was instigated by the need to rid the UN body of corruption and inefficiency to implement its functions and provide responses to many human rights issues. It had long been criticized of double standards and selectivity which allowed gross human rights violators to sit in the Commission to protect themselves and their allies from scrutiny and punishment for their own human rights abuses. Consequently, these problems seriously degraded the institution’s credibility.

Thus, much is expected from the new Council in carrying out its mandates and functions guided by the principles of universality, impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity, constructive dialogue and cooperation.

Downsized from 53 to 47 member countries, the Council held its election on 9 May 2006. Distribution of members among the different regions was based on the percentage of membership in the GA. Elected members have a three-year term. Re-election is not allowed for those who have already served two consecutive terms.