Safeguarding civil society participation in the Helsinki process - a matter of the OSCE’s raison d’être

Forfour decades, civil society groups have played a crucial role in monitoring,documenting and reporting on the implementation of the human dimensioncommitments undertaken by participating States in the framework of theConference and later the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.By engaging with the OSCE, NGOs have helped to keep human rights high on theagenda, mobilize attention to human rights crises and shape OSCE action onpressing human rights issues. Now some governments, which have adoptedlegislation and policies restricting civil society activities in their owncountries, are pushing for new rules and regulations to limit civil societyparticipation at the level of the OSCE. Introducing measures to this end wouldnegatively and irreversibly affect the OSCE’s credibility at a time when civilsociety actors are facing unprecedented pressure across the region and, morethan ever, need OSCE forums to make their voices heard.

TheOSCE was the first international structure to embrace a comprehensive approachto security, with participating States agreeing to establish respect for humanrights as one of its founding pillars and to be held accountable to each otherand to their citizens for their achievements in this regard. When signing theHelsinki Final Act in 1975, states from both the then Western and Eastern blocalso acknowledged the right of individuals to know and act upon their rights,as well as to contribute to the Helsinki process, commitments that havesubsequently been reiterated in numerous OSCE documents. In addition, thesignatories to the Helsinki Final Act undertook to publish and disseminate thisdocument as widely as possible within their countries. The Helsinki Conferenceand Final Act inspired the emergence of so-called Helsinki groups in the SovietUnion and Eastern Europe to monitor compliance with the accords. Although thesegroups were forced to operate underground and were fiercely persecuted by theirgovernments, they carried out their activities in a determined manner,supported by solidarity groups set up in Western countries. As we know fromhistory, the Helsinki groups were part of the grassroots movements that helpedbring about the collapse of the communist rule and the end of the Cold War.Both these pioneers and civil society groups that have continued theirgroundbreaking work have been guided by the belief that citizens’ participationis an intrinsic element of the Helsinki process and thus of efforts to securepeace and prosperity in the OSCE region.

Thecurrent modalities for civil society participation in OSCE events are laid downin the Concluding Document from the 1992 Helsinki meeting, as well as PermanentCouncil decision no. 476 adopted in 2002. These regulations grant NGOrepresentatives the right to participate and provide input on an equal footingwith government representatives at human rights review conferences,implementation meetings and seminars on condition that they register with theOffice for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). States that seekto change these rules and restrict NGO access advocate for procedures thatwould grant governments the right to approve and thereby block theparticipation of civil society representatives, for example, because theirorganizations are not registered at the national level, they are considered tolack “relevant” experience or they are accused of supporting “extremism” or”terrorism”. Any state approval procedure of this kind would be contrary to thebasic principle of unhindered and equal NGO participation in OSCE events andwould open the door for arbitrary, selective, discriminatory and politicallymotivated decisions to limit access for organizations and individuals whocriticize the policies of their governments and address issues that areinconvenient to them. In the past, some participating States have alreadysought to prevent the participation of outspoken civil society representativesfrom their countries at the annual Human Dimension Implementation Meeting andother OSCE events.

Recentyears have seen a growing trend of shrinking and even closing civil societyspace in many countries of the OSCE region.[i] As part of this trend, states haveexploited security concerns to justify far-reaching restrictions on civilsociety and to crack down on NGOs that work on “sensitive” issues, inparticular human rights. Among others, states have denied registration andforced NGOs to close down, labelled them “foreign agents”, and prosecuted theirleaders using broadly worded extremism and terrorism legislation that does notmeet the fundamental principle of legality and can be applied to conduct thathas nothing to do with violence.[ii] Human rights groups and defenders workingto promote women’s rights, minority rights and the rights of vulnerablecommunities have in particular been singled out for persecution. Repressivepolicies of this kind pursued at the national level must not be allowed toinfluence the procedures and rules for NGO participation at the OSCE level byallowing participating States to justify restricting access to groups that havebeen targeted merely for exercising their fundamental rights to freedom ofexpression, association and assembly in a peaceful and legitimate way.

FormerUN Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and ofAssociation Maina Kiai has warned of the danger of closing civil society spaceat the international level because of the efforts of some governments tosilence NGOs not only in their own countries but also on the internationalstage.[iii] Along with NGOs, he has criticized theexisting accreditation procedure for NGOs through the UN Economic and SocialCouncil (ECOSOC), the Committee on NGOs of which decides on UN consultativestatus for NGOs. Possessing consultative states grants NGOs access to a rangeof UN bodies and processes, including the Human Rights Council where they candeliver oral and written statements and organize side-events. As highlighted ina joint appeal signed by over 230 NGOs from over 45 countries in May 2016[iv], some states use the ECOSOC accreditationprocedure to deliberately delay or block NGOs from participation at the UN,through perpetual questioning and repeated deferrals of applications foraccreditation. This has resulted in that NGOs have been denied accreditationfor years. Thus, through their actions, individual states have turned what ismeant to be a primarily technical role of the ECOSOC NGO Committee into apoliticized practice used to obstruct access for NGOs working on issues thatthey do not like. Human rights NGOs are amongst those facing the most obstaclesin gaining accreditation.

Asthe UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and ofAssociation has stressed[v], the misuse of the ECOSOC accreditationprocedure to block NGO access has “profoundly undermine[d] the ability of theUnited Nations to constructively engage with civil society”, with negativeimplications for the effectiveness and credibility of the organization as awhole. This example should serve as a warning to the OSCE. Rather thanintroducing any regulations or procedures that may be used to restrict NGOaccess for politically motivated reasons, the OSCE should focus on improvingand further strengthening opportunities for NGOs to participate in andcontribute to the work of the organization. To this end, the participatingStates should consider introducing new formats for government-civil societydialogue and civil society consultations, as a complement to existing ones.[vi] In accordance with its founding values,the OSCE has a responsibility to stand up for civil society organizations thatare repressed and denied fundamental rights at home and to provide a platformfor them to voice their positions since they lack direct channels ofcommunication with their governments.

TheOSCE participating States have themselves repeatedly recognized that theinvolvement of civil society is crucial in achieving progress on the objectivesof the organization and they have committed themselves to ensuring that membersof civil society groups have unhindered access to the OSCE and otherinternational organizations. The OSCE Guidelines on the Protection of HumanRights Defenders, which are based on OSCE commitments and universallyrecognized human rights standards, also require the participating States torefrain from any action undermining the right of human rights defenders toprovide information, submit cases or participate in meetings with internationalbodies, including OSCE institutions.[vii]

Asin the case of the UN, ensuring continued unhindered access for NGOs to OSCEevents is not only a matter of safeguarding the rights of these groups and thecommunities they represent, but also of safeguarding the effectiveness,credibility and very raison d’être of the OSCE. The organization wasestablished to promote peace, stability, democracy and the rights of the peopleof the vast region stretching from Vancouver to Vladivostok rather than as aforum for governments to protect their interests. The recent attempts by someparticipating States to restrict civil society participation run counter tothese objectives and may in themselves be considered early warning signs ofthreats to peace and stability in the OSCE region. The participation of civil societyactors, who address crosscutting issues of human security, is a key element ofthe organization’s comprehensive and inclusive security agenda and aprecondition for the success of conflict prevention, democratization andpeacebuilding processes in the long term. We appeal to all OSCE participatingStates to ensure that the organization continues to serve its founding role inyears to come and that government-civil society dialogue remains at the heartof the Helsinki process.

Signedby the following CSP members:

InternationalPartnership for Human Rights (IPHR, Belgium)
Bulgarian Helsinki Committee
Public Verdict (Russia)
Helsinki Committee of Armenia
Swiss Helsinki Committee
Macedonian Helsinki Committee
Center for Civil Liberties (Ukraine)
DRA – German-Russian Exchange (Germany)
Kharkiv Regional Foundation “Public Alternative” (Ukraine)
Centre for the Development of Democracy and Human Rights (Russia)
Union of Women of the Don Region (Russia)
Hungarian Helsinki Committee
Citizens’ Watch (Russia)
Protection of Rights without Borders (Armenia)
Human Rights Movement “Bir Duino-Kyrgyzstan”
Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and the Rule of Law
Legal Policy Research Center (Kazakhstan)
Barys Zvozskau Belarusian Human Rights House
Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly-Vanadzor (Armenia)
Human Rights Matter (Germany)
Office of Civil Freedoms (Tajikistan)
Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (Poland)
Public Association “Dignity” (Kazakhstan)
Regional Center for Strategic Studies (Georgia/Azerbaijan)
Austrian Helsinki Association
Crude Accountability (United States)
Human Rights Center “Viasna” (Belarus)
Association of Ukrainian Human Rights Monitors on Law Enforcement (UMDPL)
SOVA Centre for Information and Analysis (Russia)
Article 19 (United Kingdom)
ZARA – Zivilcourage und Anti-Rassismus-Arbeit (Austria)
IDP Women Association “Consent” (Georgia)
Kosova Rehabilitation Centre for Torture Victims (KRCT)
Moscow Helsinki Group
Nota Bene (Tajikistan)
Human Rights Center of Azerbaijan
Netherlands Helsinki Committee
Italian Coalition for Civil Liberties and Rights (CILD)
UNITED for Intercultural Action (Netherlands)
Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Human Rights (Austria)
Promo LEX (Moldova)
Human Rights Group “Citizen. Army. Law” (Russia)
Humanrights.ch (Switzerland)
Fair Trials (United Kingdom)
Center for Participation and Development (CPD, Georgia)
Human Rights Monitoring Institute (Lithuania)
World Organization against Torture (OMCT)
Minority Rights Group Europe
Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety (IRFS, Azerbaijan)
OSCE Network (Sweden)
Norwegian Helsinki Committee
Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) Germany

[i]See Hamburg Declaration on Protecting and Expanding Civil Society Space,adopted by the participants of the 2016 OSCE Parallel Civil Society Conference,Hamburg, 6-7 December 2017,http://www.civicsolidarity.org/sites/default/files/parallel_civil_society_conference_outcome_documents_hamburg_december_2016_final.pdf;as well as the outcome document of the 2017 OSCE Parallel Civil SocietyConference, Vienna, 5-6 December 2017.

[ii]See the Vienna Declaration: Preventing Security Measures from Eclipsing HumanRights, adopted by the participants of the 2017 OSCE Parallel Civil SocietyConference.

[iii]See comment at http://freeassembly.net/news/commentary-ngo-committee/

[iv]The appeal is available athttps://www.ishr.ch/sites/default/files/documents/final_ecosoc_ngo_committee_english.pdf

[v]See http://freeassembly.net/news/commentary-ngo-committee/

[vi]For more recommendations on how to improve civil society participation in theOSCE, see the outcome document of the 2017 OSCE Parallel Civil SocietyConference, Vienna, 5-6 December 2017. [vii] Par. 91 of the Guidelines on the Protection of Human RightsDefenders,http://www.osce.org/odihr/guidelines-on-the-protection-of-human-rights-defenders?download=true