UNITED FOR KAKUMA

Membership in Islam distinguishes approximately 25% of the current global population and is recognized as the state religion in numerous countries across the Middle East and North Africa. Similarly to Christianity, the Islamic faith often entails the subordination of women to men. The patriarchal religious framework takes on varying forms depending on the specific circumstances, leading to behaviors that may discriminate against or oppress women in the different regions where Islam is practiced. Given the recent Iran uprisings against the Islamic regime aimed at curbing violence against women, we believe it is crucial to provide an overview of the role of women within the Islamic religious context. This includes an examination of how such a role translates into norms and behaviors that suppress the freedoms that should rightfully be afforded to all women on their journey toward emancipation. The religion and the sources of Law A distinguishing factor between Islam and Christianity is that the sacred text – the Quran – is presently acknowledged as a legal source in countries where Shari’a (Islamic law) is upheld. The Islamic Republic of Iran, Afghanistan during the Taliban rule, and various other nations embrace Shari’a as a collection of affirmative legal principles, specifically combining Islamic law, state legislation, and local customary practices. The sacred writings that constitute Islamic law are composed of commandments concerning the actions of the believers, which are categorized as prohibited, disapproved, recommended, or compulsory. However, the norms discussed here make up a behavioral or customary code that pertains to worship and ritual obligations; considering them legally binding often entails the violation of citizens’ civil rights. As previously noted, religious regimes that have embraced Shari’a law have also turned into oppressors of the rights and liberties of women within their own nations, implementing the most stringent interpretation of sacred scriptures as the state law. Moving forward, we will examine the position occupied by women within the Islamic community according to the Quran and the writings comprising Shari’a, aiming to grasp the regulations that enforce control over women in countries like Iran. The value of women according to Islamic tradition Shari’a recognizes a fundamental equality between men and women before God. Nevertheless, in the worldly order, the two sexes are deemed complementary and assume diametrically distinct roles. This often translates into the control of women by men, as the latter takes responsibility for the family’s economy and the role of the household head, while women are confined to the domestic sphere, upholding purity in their roles as wives and mothers. According to the scriptures, the status and rights afforded to men are also extended to women, who can receive education, own property, and achieve economic advancement. Indeed, the Quran defends the individuality of women and grants them the freedom to safeguard their honor, receive a share of inheritance, seek redemption, and make decisions about their lives, even in matters of marriage. While both men and women hold equal significance, they have been designed to play distinct roles in reproduction and the perpetuation of the human species, which consequently leads to differing responsibilities. Within the family unit, paternal authority is vested solely in the father, who possesses the right to exercise ta’dib’, a genuine power of correction over his wife, even allowing for the use of force. The faculties granted to Muslim men regarding their wives are undoubtedly superior, but it is important to remember that, according to Revelation, human beings are created by God in two opposing genders with the capacity and moral duty to share love and respect for one another. The rights of women within the Islamic Community Male authority over women is legitimized by a hadith of the Prophet, stating that a woman is deficient in faith and intelligence. The position of women in Islam can be succinctly described by these Quranic phrases: women should treat their husbands as husbands treat them: with kindness. However, men hold a higher status because God has chosen some over others, and they provide resources for their support. There are numerous areas in which women are subordinate to men according to Islamic tradition. These include: the obligation of monogamy, the prohibition of marrying men of different faiths, the prohibition of divorce, the asymmetry of access to divorce, the granting of children, and inheritance. Specifically, the punishment for the murder of a woman is half that for a man, the testimony of two women, if accepted, is considered equivalent to that of one man, and the same principle extends to matters of inheritance. Women are ineligible for the roles of caliph or imam, and they are excluded from serving as judges or guardians. According to Shari’a law, a woman’s ability to take action is constrained until her marriage, which is a pivotal moment as it establishes the foundation of the family. Marriage in Islam is not a sacrament but a ceremony that falls within the natural order and is perceived as a genuine contract between two parties: the husband and the wife or her legal representative. A man can marry up to a maximum of four wives, provided he treats each of them with dignity and equality. Hence, the early Muslim family structure holds a distinct patriarchal character and is founded on male descent. In present times, this manifests as the objectification of women in countries governed by Shari’a law, reducing them to mere commodities within the framework of marital transactions. Many women are compelled into early marriages without their consent, thus fueling the phenomena of child brides and coerced unions. As a general rule, it can be asserted that in the Islamic world, from a legal perspective, the value of two women is deemed equivalent to that of one man. Symbolically, women are perceived as upholders of the purity within the community’s structure, while also embodying the representation of sexuality that requires regulation to prevent adverse effects on the community’s harmony. As a result, women carry the twofold responsibility of safeguarding traditional family values and purity, while also serving as a

In Peru, as in most Latin American societies, gender equality is obstructed by the so-called machismo. Although women can enjoy basic rights, such as the right to vote and to own property, there is a cultural and sociological factor in the structure of communities that hinders the emancipation of women in all areas of society. The phenomenon of machismo, which is widespread throughout the continent (but also in the rest of the world), is identifiable in the literacy rate, in the difficulty of access to the profession and to health care, and in the scarce political participation of Peruvian women; it is more present in the rural areas of the country.      In the countryside areas, where the social differences between the two genders are at their peak, machismo stereotypes penetrate the community consciousness much more than in the big cities. Indeed, most of the population associates women with the domestic sphere, assigning them, perhaps unconsciously, the role of mother and wife, thus depriving them of the right to choose their own destiny. From an early age, Peruvian girls lose their aspiration for a lifestyle different from the traditional one, and their school performance suffers. In smaller towns, it is extremely difficult to find a woman in a position of power, whether in a profession or in politics. The lack of examples to emulate reinforces the belief that women should be confined to the home, leaving only men to pursue a professional career.    Statista estimates, in 2021, Peru ranked 17th in the Gender Gap Index, out of 26 Latin American countries. We will now analyse Peruvian women’s access to the spheres of society, highlighting those in which machismo is predominant in violating gender equality. Education, profession and politics: analysing the gender gap In 2020, a World Bank survey in Peru recorded a 5 percentage point difference between male literacy (97%), and female literacy (92%) among the population over 15 years old. Both percentages, although still on the rise, have slowed in the last year of COVID-19 pandemic, when the population has been forced to forego education to cope with the resulting crisis. The gender gap is widest in rural areas and within indigenous communities speaking native languages. However, we assist to an improvement thanks to the reforms of customary laws in recent decades, which are opening up the professional world to new generations of women, thus encouraging them to continue their studies. Since the enactment of these reforms, the percentage of women’s participation in the labour force has also improved, reaching 70.6% last year, according to estimates by the International Labour Organization.Peru illustrates how legal reforms – especially when accompanied by declining fertility – can effectively drive increased female labour force participation and financial inclusion, also benefiting the country’s GDP. However, economic and cultural constraints continue to limit women’s professional opportunities. Although the country has one of the smallest gender gaps in Latin America in terms of access to employment, Peruvian women tend to be relegated to lower paid jobs such as nursing and teaching. What’s more, domestic responsibilities and family care needs further limit their work options. In 2015, women earned about 19% less than men in hourly earnings; a gap that widens further when we consider indigenous women. Indeed, in poor, rural and indigenous communities, typical jobs of the informal economy, made up of small and medium-sized family businesses, prevail (only 30% of these businesses are formal). This means that most women are in a position of extreme vulnerability to market risks. These women remain excluded from government policies to promote and protect women’s employment, and from the financial literacy needed to actually develop their businesses and/or bring them into the formal economy. Government figures show that 60 per cent of all women workers in the country continue to work in the informal economy, and only 15 per cent have health coverage, while only 4 per cent enjoy pension benefits. The country has a ninety-eight day maternity leave policy and other programmes to support working mothers, yet women working in the informal sector do not benefit.         Regarding the political situation, women gained the right to vote in Peru in 1955, one of the last countries in the Latin American region. Nevertheless, the country is making concrete progress for equal political representation through the promulgation of reforms that have made equality and alternation criteria mandatory since the general elections of 2021. It is since the approval of Law No. 31030 that presidential lists must have at least one woman or one man in their composition, placed alternately, with the aim of achieving a system of equal representation in composition and political agenda by 2031.            Currently there are several strategies used to monitor the implementation of the law and women’s participation. In this context, one of the tools is the Línea de Investigación de la Dirección Nacional de Educación y Formación Cívica Ciudadana (DNEF), which analyses information on electoral processes in order to improve its dissemination among citizens and the media, with the aim of influencing the strengthening of the political system and democracy.            According to a survey carried out last March by the DNEF, the last parliamentary elections saw the presence of 3 women out of 16 in the Andean Congress. The proportion has improved in recent years thanks to electoral quotas. However, it should be noted that the positions held by women on the electoral lists remain low. Women’s safety and health: the downside of the Gender Gap in Peru Violence against women is a worrying phenomenon in all Latin American countries. An increasing number of violent murders of women committed by men in the last two decades has forced Latin American countries to adopt specific measures to limit this phenomenon, especially after the Convention of Belém do Pará: among these, the inclusion of ‘feminicide’ as a specific aggravated crime in the various national legislations. Despite the difficulties in measuring and comparing the incidence of this type of crime in different countries, linked to the lack of capacity and the lack

After the last appointment of LM Pride’s column that delved into the current status of LGBTQ+ rights in Egypt, today we explore the context of another country in the MENA region, with deeply contradictory characters. In Yemen, in fact, the discussion surrounding LGBTQ+ rights is severely hampered by the civil conflict, triggered by the 2011 Arab Springs, which has been perpetuated since 2015 between pro-government Sunni forces and the Shiite Zaidi Houthi movement, after the latter advanced on the capital Sanaa. The political situation in the country is turbulent, with four regional administrations in the south of the country refusing to follow the central government’s guidelines following the 2015 constitutional reform, and major international powers such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, supporting the parties, vying for influence over the territory. In the background, a civil war that counted more than 230,000 dead in 2020 and left an estimated 24 million people in need of humanitarian support in 2021 – one of the most catastrophic conflicts of our time. All of this has only exacerbated trends already present in the deeply conservative country, which is firmly tied to its Islamic roots – according to the most recent data, 99% of the local population is Muslim, with uncertain estimates regarding the split between Sunni and Shia, though according to the U.S. State Department, they hover around 65% and 35% respectively. In Yemen, then, being a queer person effectively implies a risk to one’s life, and the conflict has wiped out any possibility of effective debate or policy advancement for the LGBTQ+ community. Legislative Framework and Impact on Civil Society Yemen was previously made up of two territorial units: the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen in the southern region, and the Yemen Arab Republic in the northern region. Then unified in 1990, and after the secessionist Marxist movements in the South were finally crushed four years later, the country built its political and legal identity on the characters of the Islamic State that had ruled the North until then. So, just as in Afghanistan, Yemen’s legislative framework is dictated by the Shari’ah. In this sense, sexual relations between persons of the same sex are considered in the same way as relations outside the marriage bond, and therefore prohibited as a threat to the institution of marriage and procreation. In particular, homosexual “sodomy” is condemned by a Hadd punishment, as it would cross the limits of the “law of God”.As can be seen in the Constitution, Yemen proclaims itself an “Arab, Islamic and independent sovereign state” in Article 1, and Article 3 points to the Islamic Shari’ah as the source of all legislation. This has very heavy implications on the LGBTQ+ community. Despite the fact that Article 6 and 41 profess Yemen’s adherence to the UN Charter and the International Declaration of Human Rights, respectively, and the formal equality of citizens and their rights, the status of queer people is in fact criminalized in the Penal Code. In Section 11, concerning “Adultery, Defamation and Corruption of Morality”, one can read how the judicial system harshly condemns homosexuality and lesbianism, providing for capital punishment in the first case: Article 264: Homosexuality is the contact of one man with another through his posterior; both sodomites, male or female, are punished by flogging of one hundred strokes if unmarried. Imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year is lawful. If married, the penalty is death by stoning. Article 268: Lesbianism is sexual intercourse between two women. Anyone who performs such an act shall be punished by imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. If the act takes place with coercion, the imprisonment may be extended to seven years. A substantial difference between the penalties for lesbianism and homosexuality is immediately apparent. There is also a lack of any definition and mention of other gender identities and sexual orientations included in the LGBTQ+ community, which are in any case punished under the general definition of acts of sodomy or outrage to public ethics. This underscores how the Yemeni legislative system was formed on the basis of patriarchal norms rooted in a binary conception of gender and male domination in any relevant social field, offering him a superior position to that of any minority. Consequently, while the relationship between two men is seen as “demasculinizing”, a renunciation of one’s privileges, and therefore to be harshly punished even with death, any other queer identity is erased and reduced to the category of homosexuality. It is no coincidence that, with regard to gender and sexual identity discrimination, the latest report of the Council for the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on the Yemeni context harshly criticized “the abuse of the judicial system to reinforce traditional gender roles”. Perception and Social Status Already living in an inherently discriminatory context, the civil conflict meant that the LGBTQ+ community, along with other minorities in the country as is often the case in violent situations, were further ostracized and persecuted by all sides. In the report of the Group of Eminent Experts on Yemen compiled in 2020 for OHCHR there are chilling testimonies of queer people in the country. Prior to the outbreak of violence, although stigma was already culturally present in the Yemeni social fabric, the people interviewed felt they could express themselves freely within safe spaces created by the community predominantly in large cities. However, beginning in 2015, it became impossible to maintain these spaces, and the parties to the conflict all participated in the wave of violence that was unleashed against non-conforming sexual subjectivities.Also in this report, the Panel verified a number of violations of the rights of various transgender and non-binary people by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) in the capital Sanaa, under the control of the Houthi movement, following arbitrary detentions based on the alleged sexual identity of the victims during a campaign against “immorality” conducted from 2018 to 2020. Under detention, respondents were subjected to rape, sexual torture, forced medical examinations, and corporal punishment

The darkness of the forest freezes the hearts while the icy winter wind kills. Thousands of people are running through the forest, dogs bark in the distance and voices shout in a language they do not know. There is no light in the forest at night, there is no path to follow, one cannot see out of the palm of one’s nose. Hundreds of people hold their hands to navigate and above all to not get lost. Their final destination? Poland, the first European country on their route. This is not an adventurous film, this is not Rambo or the Hunger Games, but reality, this is what is happening on the border between Belarus, Poland and Lithuania. Thousands of people have been escorted to the border by Lukashenko’s government, where they have been left to their own devices, pushed towards Poland on the one hand, pushed back outside the European borders on the other. According to Poland, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko is deliberately provoking a new refugee crisis in Europe by organising the movement of migrants from the Middle East to Minsk, promising them safe passage to Europe, as revenge for the sanctions imposed by Brussels on the authoritarian regime. The prime minister then decided to stage a reprisal made up of the bodies of men, women and children. Thousands of refugees and asylum seekers were pushed out of Minsk, transported to the Polish border where they were used as perfect pawns of a sick game. At the border, all these individuals were left to their own devices, to navigate their way through the dense northern European forest in search of a way to cross the border. The Polish government, however, decided to respond with extreme violence to this war of bodies rather than weapons. Some 20,000 Polish border guards, assisted by the army, have been deployed on the frontier in a show of force alien to the country since the end of the cold war. The forces patrol the border, which is covered by metres of barbed wire fences, to prevent anyone from crossing. In this way, they carry out rejections, like those implemented last year on the border between Bosnia and Croatia. Refugees huddled at the border are not only refused entry but also shelter from the freezing Polish winter. Hundreds of people, mothers, fathers, children can be seen sitting on the frozen ground, waiting for an OK from the police. Not even the humanitarian organisations that have been there, nor the Polish ones, such as Grupa Granica, a network of Polish NGOs active at the border since the beginning of the humanitarian crisis, have been granted access. A safe zone of three kilometres has been created where no one except police can enter. This means that the refugees have to walk through the forest for three kilometres before they can meet any organisation that can provide them with shelter, medical care, or even just basic necessities they might need. Added to this is the brutality of the border police who do not shy away from treating with violence any person who even tries to cross the border. Water cannons are violently directed at any person who even tries to approach the border, brutally throwing the harmless victims to the ground. Many people also suffer electrocution wounds to the neck, bruises from being kicked by guns, and cuts and bruises from being pushed over barbed wire fences, as Lorenzo Tondo’s article in The Guardian testifies. Thus, one wonders where are all those fundamental rights guaranteed to every individual that the European states signed up to in the Nice Charter. One wonders what has happened to that right in Article 18 of the same Charter, which guarantees the right to asylum, but also, and above all, all those rights, even above the European Union itself, which prohibit and protect against refoulement and rejections. One wonders what Europe, the homeland but also the mother of fundamental rights, is doing while it silently watches a humanitarian crisis unfold at its borders. We at Large Movement demand that the rights of women, men and children who find themselves stranded between the two borders are respected, that humanitarian organisations are allowed safe passage through the safe zone, that refugees are provided with humanitarian and legal assistance, but above all, that they are allowed to cross the border safely without being exposed to illegal violence, thus ensuring the respect of their fundamental rights. If you liked the article Share us!

In general, societies all over the world recognize rights to living beings and to human beings in the first place. The type of rights recognized varies according to the cultures, traditions, political and ideological systems of each society, but, according to the so-called naturalists, it is commonly accepted that there are some fundamental rights that are independent from the legal system to which they belong. These rights are defined as “rights of nature”. So the question arises: are there “environmental rights” among the rights of nature? The answer is controversial and not at all obvious. In recent years, progress has been made and the issue of the environment is no longer an elitist discourse that only scientists and activists talk about. Environmental protection movements have spread globally, the international political agenda has set as a top priority that of reducing climate change and facing the consequent environmental disasters. It is clearly recognizable that this issue has really taken hold in the political debate at all levels, but this does not always translate into a true recognition of environmental rights. There is still no univocal opinion that confirms and outlines if and what they are, or at least, it is often discussed and finds controversy arising from very varied needs and contexts. There are those who focus more on the effects that environmental damage causes on humans, those on animals and those more generally on the Planet, thus complicating the attribution of these rights to specific subjects. In general, rights are always included in the binomial rights-duties that can fall on the same subject or not. In the field of environmental rights, the identification of both positions is complex and remains an unsolvable problem in many cases. In addition, environmental rights are recognized in a heterogeneous manner in the various countries of the world and this is certainly due to very different sensitivities. Some legal systems have felt the urgency to recognize environmental rights before others for reasons that affect them more closely, while others continue to dodge the issue due to economic and political interests, which in fact impose themselves on the weaker social and environmental interests, often crushing them. Among the countries that are active in the search for greater protection of environmental rights are some Latin American countries, including Argentina, where in 2004 a group of residents of the Matanza-Riachuelo river basin (in the province of Buenos Aires) raised the issue of the pollution of the area due to the activities of 44 companies operating there. The aim was not only to protest against the companies, but also to obtain recognition of rights that did not exist until then, or at least had not been considered, due to the damage suffered as a result of the pollution of the basin. The claims did not only concern compensation for the damage already produced by these activities, but had a longer-term vision. The plaintiffs demanded an increase in the quality of life, the repair of the disaster caused and the prevention of future ones as fundamental commitments that the Argentine Supreme Court, before which the case had been presented, should recognize and enforce on the part of government and local authorities. This case represents a victory on the level of recognition of the rights of the environment in the hands of a certain community directly affected by an environmental disaster or damage to the quality of the environment by other subjects, which on that occasion were indicated as the State, the Province of Buenos Aires and the City of Buenos Aires. The environmental damage fell on the entire community, which was therefore the victim and claimed the right to compensation, the cessation of polluting activities and the implementation of remedies to restore the previous condition. Since that time, the Court has established an action plan that ACUMAR (the government agency responsible for the Matanza-Riachuelo River Basin) must implement. Among the goals of the plan are to initiate public information dissemination, control pollution from industries, clean up landfills, expand water supply, develop an emergency health plan and adopt an international measurement system to assess compliance with the plan’s goals (Mendoza Beatriz Silva et al vs. State of Argentina et al on damages resulting from environmental pollution of Matanza/Riachuelo river, 2008). What happened around the Matanza-Riachuelo river has set the conditions to face the environmental issues throughout the country submitting them to a new perspective, that is the defense of the quality of life, collective health and promotion of human rights in a wider range, including therefore also those arising from environmental aspects, which also have considerable effects on economic, social and cultural rights. From a local claim arose the need to provide at the national level a greater commitment on the part of the competent authorities, which in this case is represented by ACUMAR, and allowed for a broader participation of civil society in the process of elaboration and monitoring of environmental and other policies. In order to allow a wider participation of civil society, a fundamental requirement is access to information, which favors a clear vision of the problem to be analyzed, stimulating discussion and subsequent resolution through the activation of collective practices. What has been said so far is a clear example of how the value attributed and shared of the environment by a community strengthens its action on the political and social level, allowing the achievement of results that, taken as a whole, can gradually build a global society more respectful and grateful towards nature. Perhaps it is still necessary to stimulate a more holistic vision of the system in which the human being lives, that is to say, one that includes every single part of the Planet and takes care of its life, existence and preservation, instead of tending to its devastation at the expense of something or someone else, so that there is no doubt about whether and what rights belong to it. If you liked the article share it!