The Human Rights Council this morning held an interactive dialogue with the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, and started an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the right to education.
Pichamon Yeophantong, Chairperson of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said the Working Group’s thematic report underscored the exigent need for capacity building to advance the implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Capacity building was about assisting States with fulfilling their duty to protect human rights and enhancing business understanding of human rights due diligence, and about strengthening the voices of rights-holders affected by business-related human rights abuses to ensure corporate accountability and access to remedy.
Ms. Yeophantong said the report assessed the landscape of capacity-building measures; considered what constituted effective capacity building; and offered ambitious recommendations on how the world could work together to strengthen the capabilities of key stakeholders at the global, regional and local levels. Unless further investment was made to enhance stakeholder capacity to implement the Guiding Principles, the on-the-ground realisation of the State duty to protect and the corporate responsibility to respect human rights would lag behind stated commitments. To continue accelerating the Guiding Principles’ uptake, coordinated capacity-building efforts were needed, and a global capacity-building fund could be useful.
Ms. Yeophantong spoke about the Working Group’s country visits to Liberia, Luxembourg and Argentina. Luxembourg and Argentina spoke as countries concerned. The Consultative Commission on Human Rights of Luxembourg also took the floor.
In the ensuing discussion, speakers said that policy coordination and coherence for United Nations actions needed to be enhanced to support the implementation of the Guiding Principles across the United Nations system. The role of civil society and national human rights institutions was also important. Capacity building was a key to foster the gradual implementation of the Guiding Principles. There was a growing need to disseminate and implement the Guiding Principles and their three pillars – protect, respect and remedy. The Guiding Principles had shaped policy worldwide since their adoption. The establishment of international norms, including an international treaty on business and human rights, that dealt with these questions could better guarantee the respect of human rights by all companies across the world. The provision of capacity-building measures should be tailored to the requirements of recipients. A speaker emphasised that no one should be left behind in these endeavours, including small and medium enterprises and all rights holders in developing and least developed countries. Access to effective reparation for violations needed to be ensured.
Speaking in the dialogue were the European Union, Panama on behalf of a group of countries, United Nations Development Programme, Portugal, Egypt, Japan, United Nations Children’s Fund, Armenia, Germany, Burkina Faso, Belgium, France, Indonesia, Mexico, United States, Colombia, Malaysia, United Kingdom, Venezuela, Cameroon, Ireland, South Africa, Pakistan, Togo, India, Malawi, China, Switzerland, Chile, Benin, Cuba, Russian Federation, Brazil, Thailand, Tunisia, Azerbaijan, Ecuador, Honduras, Ukraine, Iran and Cambodia.
Also speaking was the National Human Rights Commission of India, as well as the following non-governmental organizations: China Foundation for Human Rights Development, INHR, Action Canada for Population and Development, Justiça Global, China NGO Network for International Exchanges, Sikh Human Rights Group, Peace Brigades International, Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development and the Colombian Commission of Jurists.
The Council then started an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the right to education.
Farida Shaheed, Special Rapporteur on the right to education, presenting her report on the right to education, advances and challenges, said that the right to education was a right to life-long learning and to free quality education, regardless of circumstances, location or other identities. There had been a shift from promoting an equal right to education to promoting the right to equitable and inclusive education. This was not a simple task for Governments. Inclusion meant modifying educational content, teaching methods, approaches, structures and strategies to overcome barriers so that all students could enjoy an equitable learning experience and appropriate environment. The world confronted many challenges in ensuring the right to education for all. Many challenges inherited from the past persisted. Exclusion, assimilation, segregation, discrimination, poor quality, ill-treatment and lack of safety remained striking, impeding the right to education for many.
Ms. Shaheed particularly deplored the gender apartheid and persecution, and the de jure denial of the fundamental right to education for girls and women in Afghanistan, which needed to be considered as a crime against humanity. Ms. Shaheed also expressed concern at restrictions and violations targeting education, academics and scientists. Ms. Shaheed also reported on her official visit to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization from 16 to 20 January 2023.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization spoke as the entity concerned.
In the ensuing discussion, speakers, among other things, said education was a fundamental right. It was the most effective form of investment in the fight against poverty and contributed to advancing the economy and building human capital. Speakers expressed support for rethinking the right to education as a common good. Many challenges remained in guaranteeing education for all. Achievements in schools in certain areas remained low. Speakers condemned restrictions to access to education for women and girls, and expressed concerns about the growing digital divide between developing and developed nations. Further, speakers expressed concern about numerous attacks on education facilities, which had long-lasting consequences on students, and about the rise of bullying in schools. States were encouraged to implement the Safe Schools Declaration, and involve parents and legal guardians in creating safe learning environments. States needed to uphold their commitments to ensuring inclusive and quality education for all children.
Speaking in the discussion were Luxembourg on behalf of a group of countries, European Union, Oman on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Lebanon on behalf of a group of Arab States, Côte d’Ivoire on behalf of a group of African States, Benin on behalf of a group of countries, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Timor-Leste on behalf of a group of small island developing States, Qatar on behalf of a group of countries, Kazakhstan on behalf of a group of countries, El Salvador on behalf of a group of countries, Lithuania, United Arab Emirates, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Israel, Sierra Leone, United Nations Women, Egypt, United Nations Children’s Fund, Czech Republic, Armenia, Italy, Burkina Faso, Viet Nam, Slovenia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Spain, Costa Rica, France, United States and Mauritius.
The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found . All meeting summaries can be found . Documents and reports related to the Human Rights Council’s fifty-third regular session can be found .
The Council will next meet this afternoon at 3 p.m. when it will continue the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the right to education, and start an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of climate change.
Interactive Dialogue with the Working Group on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises
Reports
The Council has before it the report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, entitled (A/HRC/53/24). Also before the Council are five addenda to the report, on the Working Group’s visit to (A/HRC/53/24/Add.1), its visit to (A/HRC/53/24/Add.2), its visit to (A/HRC/53/24/Add.3), a report on (A/HRC/53/24/Add.5), and on the visit to Argentina (A/HRC/53/24/Add.6).
Presentation of Reports
PICHAMON YEOPHANTONG, Chairperson of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said the Working Group’s thematic report underscored the exigent need for capacity building to advance the implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Capacity building was about assisting States with fulfilling their duty to protect human rights and enhancing business understanding of human rights due diligence, and about strengthening the voices of rights-holders affected by business-related human rights abuses to ensure corporate accountability and access to remedy.
Ms. Yeophantong said the report assessed the landscape of capacity-building measures; considered what constituted effective capacity building; and offered ambitious recommendations on how the world could work together to strengthen the capabilities of key stakeholders at the global, regional and local levels. Unless further investment was made to enhance stakeholder capacity to implement the Guiding Principles, the on-the-ground realisation of the State duty to protect and the corporate responsibility to respect human rights would lag behind stated commitments. To continue accelerating the Guiding Principles’ uptake, coordinated capacity-building efforts were needed, and a global capacity-building fund could be useful.
Ms. Yeophantong presented observations from the Working Group’s country visits to Liberia, Luxembourg, and Argentina. The Working Group acknowledged the excellent support of all three Governments during the preparation and conduct of the visits. The Working Group visited Liberia from 31 October to 11 November 2022. It welcomed Government initiatives to advance responsible business conduct and address business-related human rights abuses, particularly in mining and agribusiness. The Working Group noted legislation that protected human rights and the environment in business activities and welcomed the Government’s plans to develop a national action plan on business and human rights. However, serious concerns remained regarding the implementation of existing regulations, particularly the abuses suffered by workers and communities in large concession areas. There was a lack of key infrastructure, over-dependence on the extractives and agricultural sectors, high youth unemployment, gender inequality, and multidimensional poverty. The Working Group was alarmed by the unequal distribution of benefits, which fuelled social tension. Public participation remained inadequate, and the alleged suppression of human rights defenders’ activities was especially troubling.
The Working Group visited Luxembourg from 1 to 9 December 2022. It was encouraged by efforts to advance responsible business conduct and noted good practices, including in development and gender finance. It also welcomed the adoption of two national action plans on business and human rights. But challenges remained, including the need for meaningful civil society participation in policymaking and ensuring access to remedy for victims of human rights abuses committed in other States by businesses domiciled in Luxembourg. The report recommended mapping access to justice and effective remedies in Luxembourg. It also urged the Government to permit collective recourse lawsuits and the representation of individuals by civil society organizations, and to enact legislation against strategic lawsuits against public participation. The Working Group strongly supported the full inclusion of the financial sector, including investment funds, under the proposed European Union directive and in Luxembourg’s human rights due diligence legislation.
The Working Group visited Argentina from 16 to 28 February 2023. It welcomed the development of a national action plan on business and human rights, including the national baseline assessment. Challenges included the need for increased policy coherence across different ministries and administrative levels, and the need for improved implementation of the relevant regulations. The Working Group also expressed concern regarding the treatment of workers, indigenous peoples, and other groups at risk in sectors such as the extractive industries and agribusiness, along with ongoing difficulties in ensuring effective access to remedy. Issues concerning the harassment of human rights defenders, indigenous leaders, and union representatives were also raised in relation to economic displacement and the loss of livelihoods. The report encouraged the Government to delineate clear expectations for businesses to respect human rights, including throughout their value chains. It also highlighted the advances made by the Government in relation to transnational justice and gender equality and encouraged further progress.
Ms. Yeophantong also presented the Working Group’s development finance institutions report, which detailed how the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights applied to development finance institutions, and reported on its participation in the Seventh Regional Forum for Latin America and the Caribbean on Business and Human Rights and the 2022 Forum on Business and Human Rights.
Statements by Countries Concerned
Argentina, speaking as a country concerned, said Argentina was one of the main drivers of resolution 17/4 in which the Human Rights Council espoused the Guiding Principles of the United Nations on Business and Human Rights, and set up the Working Group with the mandate of attaining the principles, identifying and sharing best practices, and providing recommendations and training in drafting national principles on businesses and human rights. The visit had been a great challenge, as it overlapped with the drafting of the national programme on business and human rights, which was currently in the final stages. The report had been useful in dialogue for the elaboration of this plan, and thus Argentina appreciated the recommendations in the report on drafting as well as monitoring implementation of the plan so as to ensure political consistency, transparency, institutionality and continuity of the policy.
Luxembourg, speaking as a country concerned, said Luxembourg set great store by the issue of due diligence by businesses and their responsibility to respect human rights. Significant progress had been made in that regard, particularly through the adoption of two national guiding plans to implement the Guidelines on Business and Human Rights adopted by the United Nations. Inclusive financing was part and parcel of sustainable financing, but was not mentioned in the report; inclusive financing was a part of the development policy of Luxembourg, aiming to provide equal access to financial services to all parts of the population, in particular those that were most marginalised, aiming to create opportunities for clients to become more autonomous, and achieving inclusive growth. With regard to the holding of investment companies, those registered in the country were subject to robust legislation and to fiscal obligations. The report gave particular focus to the European directive and the position that Luxembourg should take in the negotiations: Luxembourg had been working for a long time to ensure that that text was adopted, and had been working to achieve compromise. Luxembourg would continue to work to promote human rights in business.
Consultative Commission on Human Rights of Luxembourg said that there was a general desire to give a greater place to human rights in the business sector in Luxembourg. However, there was more to be done. It was regrettable that the Government’s position on the duty of vigilance was not transparent; it was not committed to closer alignment with governing states and that it advocated the exclusion of investment funds. The Consultative Commission recommended that Luxembourg review its position and actively support the European Parliament’s proposal, while advocating for a wider scope for the proposal. The Commission noted the recent tabling of a bill on the duty of vigilance by two members of the Luxembourg Parliament. It expressed hope that the Government and Parliament would support this initiative. The Commission noted that some elements of the national action plan on business and human rights had not been carried out. These shortcomings recently prompted a collective of 17 civil society organizations to withdraw from the working group implementing the action plan. The Government was neglecting the concerns of human rights experts in this regard.
Discussion
In the ensuing discussion, a number of speakers said the report emphasised that capacity-building measures must be based on high-quality, authoritative guidance, in order to support the coherence of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and it identified ways to build and strengthen coherent and effective capacity in the area of business and human rights. Common understanding should ensure common implementation. Enhancing policy coordination and coherence for United Nations actions in all relevant areas and levels should be a priority, including through support for the implementation of the Guiding Principles across the United Nations system. The role of civil society and national human rights institutions was also important. Capacity building was a key to foster the gradual implementation of the Guiding Principles.
Some speakers said the Working Group’s report was a timely reminder of the need to build capacities for the achievement of the United Nations Guiding Principles. There was a growing need to disseminate and implement the Guiding Principles and their three pillars – protect, respect and remedy. But dissemination and implementation were difficult tasks if there were no capacity-building measures for States, businesses and other actors, such as civil society and national human rights institutions. The priority would be, a speaker said, to ensure policy coherence, to strengthen coordination between different actors, and to address the capacity needs of rights-holders in vulnerable and marginalised situations. Collective efforts at the domestic, regional, and international level were ahead before the Guiding Principles prevailed.
Business was intrinsic to the social and economic fabric of the world, and virtually all children were impacted one way or another by business activity – as consumers of products and services, through exposure to marketing and advertising, as young workers or child labourers, as users of digital platforms, or through the environments in which they lived and played. Business activities and relationships that adversely impacted parents and caregivers could have indirect but significant impact on children. Despite this, children’s rights impacts were rarely prioritised by business, a speaker pointed out. The Guiding Principles had shaped policy worldwide since their adoption. The establishment of international norms, including an international treaty on business and human rights, that dealt with these questions could better guarantee the respect of human rights by all companies across the world.
While recognising that business enterprises had different capacities in meeting their responsibility to respect human rights, the provision of capacity-building measures should be tailored following their respective requirements. A speaker emphasised that, in this context, no one should be left behind in these endeavours, including small and medium enterprises and all rights holders in developing and least developed countries. There were still challenges in capacity building for the implementation of the Guiding Principles through processes that were accessible, sustainable, rigorous, and responsive to the needs of all. Access to effective reparation for violations must be ensured.
Among the questions raised were: could the Working Group elaborate on the means needed to run a help desk effectively and in a way that was accessible to local business actors; how could States support businesses in building their capacities to fulfil their responsibilities to protect human rights, as outlined in the report; how could States better incorporate capacity building into their national action plans for implementing the Guiding Principles; what was the Working Group’s plan to strengthen multi-stakeholder coordination in the United Nations system, especially between the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights with other United Nations agencies in pursuing the capacity-building proposals; and how could it be ensured that States and businesses worked together to eradicate forced labour from global supply chains.
Intermediary Remarks
PICHAMON YEOPHANTONG, Chairperson of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, called on Member States to cooperate with the Working Group to forge a path for change. She expressed thanks to commitments expressed by Argentina and Luxembourg. Regarding the proposed help desk on the Guiding Principles, Ms. Yeophantong said that local expertise was needed for practical interpretation of the Guiding Principles. Such expertise needed to be cultivated and given the opportunity to share this knowledge on global platforms. The help desk function could develop a body of knowledge on the Guiding Principles in collaboration with the Working Group, bearing in mind context and sensitivities. There needed to be cooperation between all stakeholders on the implementation. There was also a need for initiatives and outreach activities at local levels regarding the activities of the help desk. The Working Group was working to further refine the idea of the help desk.
Ms. Yeophantong said there was a need to ensure that the dissemination of the Guiding Principles occurred, and the Working Group would work to support this. Particular attention needed to be paid to their implementation within supply chains. Small and medium enterprises also required attention and assistance regarding their responsibilities. Capacity-building efforts needed to be tailored to the experiences of businesses in developed, developing and least developed nations. The Working Group was committed to working with other United Nations agencies to coordinate actions promoting the Guiding Principles.
Discussion
In the continuing discussion, many speakers said States must develop national action plans as a tangible commitment to achieving the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. It was important to build the capacity of businesses in this context, including through publishing human rights guidelines for businesses. International efforts to strengthen the capacity of all stakeholders must be supported. Improving access to resources and local ownership of businesses were crucial for achieving the full implementation of the Guiding Principles.
The theme of the eleventh session of the Forum on Business and Human Rights highlighted the need to place rights holders, including ordinary citizens, communities, indigenous peoples, human rights defenders, and the marginalised, at the centre of activities of business, a speaker said, noting that this was important because the evidence was clear, particularly in the African region, that the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises did impact on the rights of citizens and the environment. The lives and livelihoods of people and the well-being of the planet could not be sacrificed on the altar of business profits. Business activities could indeed be undertaken in the context where human rights were protected; where citizens and communities could freely express their views over business decisions that affected their lives and livelihoods; and where economic growth could bear benefits for all.
The Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights were important; it was equally important that when business activities resulted in rights abuses, those who were affected should have effective remedies. It was for this reason that continued engagement, in good faith, was crucial in elaborating a legally binding instrument that would regulate the activities of business, protect human rights, and promote sustainable development. An international legal instrument that would be binding should be drafted to ensure that all businesses respected human rights, although the main responsibility fell on States to ensure that business activities were undertaken through a human rights perspective. Technical assistance and capacity building were crucial.
States needed to review their legal frameworks to ensure alignment with international human rights standards. A holistic approach should be adopted in investment activities considering that human rights were cross-cutting to environmental, social and governance matters. Effective and functional grievance handling mechanisms at the investment level should be a priority. To make training accessible and meet the needs of all actors, including small- and medium-sized businesses, was vital, and consultations with all members of society were essential to achieve the implementation of the Guiding Principles. Rights holders must be made aware of their rights and the remedies that they could call on, so as to create greater synergies and improve capacities.
The report should have included specific lines of action for the protection of specific vulnerable groups, a speaker said. A binding international instrument to regulate human rights and businesses was essential to ensure that transnational corporations that were guilty of human rights violations and other international crimes be investigated for the harm done to people, the environment, and all natural resources. There should be greater collaboration, coordination, and partnership between the Working Group and relevant actors, in particular the United Nations country teams, to provide technical assistance on various cross-cutting issues related to business and human rights.
Among the questions raised were: how to improve capacity for local businesses and also civil society; what further steps could be taken to improve capacity building at the national level in the field of human rights; how could the Working Group establish knowledge hubs that took into account the situation of different areas of the world; and what measures should States take to enhance capacity building among all stakeholders.
Concluding Remarks
PICHAMON YEOPHANTONG, Chairperson of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, warmly welcomed further engagement with all concerned parties. There were concerns regarding artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies, and the Working Group would continue to work with stakeholders on these issues. It was important to incorporate capacity building into national action plans from the consultation stage. Understanding about national action plans varied from country to country, so it was important to increase understanding about national action plans. Small and medium enterprises and development finance institutions required more capacity-building assistance to raise their awareness of the Guiding Principles. Such capacity building needed to be easily understandable for different stakeholders. The Working Group was interested in engaging and negotiating on capacity-building measures.
Capacity building included diversity and intersectionality, accountability, and bottom-up designs. The key ideas of the Guiding Principles applied to all businesses irrespective of their size. Consistency was achievable. It was important to consider local contexts, including local languages. Key stakeholders needed to be allowed to participate in discussions on localising capacity-building efforts. The Working Group had developed a knowledge product on conflict with businesses, and it called on stakeholders to assist in disseminating this. Businesses often said that they were not aware that their activities were inflicting harm on local communities. It was important to reach a point where businesses could not use lack of knowledge as an excuse. There needed to be continuous learning regarding capacity building and implementation of the Guiding Principles and national action plans on business and human rights.
Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education
Reports
The Council has before it the Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to education, entitled (A/HRC/53/27), the report of the Special Rapporteur’s (A/HRC/53/27/Add.1), and (A/HRC/53/27/Add.2).
Presentation of Reports
FARIDA SHAHEED, Special Rapporteur on the right to education, said that this year marked the twenty-fifth anniversary of the mandate. Special Rapporteurs on the right to education had substantially contributed to an evolving understanding of the right to education and the obligations it entailed. Over the years, a widening consensus had been achieved on the right to education as an empowering right to life-long learning for all, as well as the importance of learning spaces as crucial platforms for learning, but also for the overall well-being and development of children, their families and communities. The right to education was a right to life-long learning and to free quality education, regardless of circumstances, location or other identities.
There had been a shift from promoting an equal right to education to promoting the right to equitable and inclusive education. This was not a simple task for Governments. Inclusion meant modifying educational content, teaching methods, approaches, structures and strategies to overcome barriers so that all students could enjoy an equitable learning experience and appropriate environment. The right to education was a right to participate in educational life in all its facets, which was a strong guarantee of inclusiveness. A participatory approach was pivotal to ensuring that education was inclusive, did not perpetuate discrimination, and did not become a tool for assimilation policies.
The world confronted many challenges in ensuring the right to education for all. Many challenges inherited from the past persisted. Exclusion, assimilation, segregation, discrimination, poor quality, ill-treatment and lack of safety remained striking, impeding the right to education for many. Ms. Shaheed particularly deplored the gender apartheid and persecution, and the de jure denial of the fundamental right to education for girls and women in Afghanistan, which needed to be considered as a crime against humanity. The many terrible violations of international law deprived children of their future, their potential, and their possible contribution to the world. Ms. Shaheed also expressed concern at restrictions and violations targeting education, academics and scientists. The Principles for Implementing the Right of Academic Freedom, being drafted by a group of experts and civil society organizations, encouraged the strengthening of monitoring and protection mechanisms for academic freedom.
Ms. Shaheed was concerned that the notion of progressive implementation to the maximum of available resources had led to de facto non-implementation of the right to education and had been used as an easy excuse for failure to take action. Many States were in breach of their obligations regarding the right to education. The right to primary, secondary and tertiary education needed to be recognised. The impact on educational systems of increased societal polarisation around cultural diversity, history teaching, decolonisation of curricula, critical race and gender theories, and comprehensive sexual education was also of concern. There was a need to consider how best to understand the right to education in an evolving manner in light of human rights standards and changing contexts and demands.
Norms were evolving related to protecting the right to education in diverse emergencies, including conflicts and climate change, for which protection frameworks needed to be enhanced. Ms. Shaheed welcomed that 118 countries had endorsed the Safe Schools Declaration. She encouraged States which had not yet endorsed the Declaration to do so, committing to avoid using educational facilities for any purpose in support of any military efforts.
Ms. Shaheed also reported on her official visit to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization from 16 to 20 January 2023. She greatly appreciated the alignment of thinking between her mandate and the Organization on the right to education as a right to life-long learning. The Organization had been very active in leading the discussions on the future of the right to education. It responded to the call of the United Nations Secretary-General to renew a social contract between Governments and their people and within societies, including on education, leading to the Transforming Education Summit in 2022. The Organization, as the lead United Nations agency on education and the guardian of the right to education, had a crucial role within the wider complex ecosystem of global and regional actors involved in education.
To deliver its mandate, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization needed Member States to demonstrate their strong and effective support, in particular through core funding, the only way to guarantee its full independence. The Organization’s monitoring mechanisms remained too weak. The time had come for the Organization and its Member States to consider opening discussions on the best ways forward to reinforce its monitoring machinery with a view to strengthening its independence, and to move from regional and global analyses to country-based analyses. The right to education, understood as a right to free public education, needed to be a starting point in all discussions with the private sector.
Statement by Entity Concerned
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, speaking as an entity concerned, said while considerable progress had been made over the years, disadvantaged and vulnerable groups continued to be the most affected by persistent barriers to education, and new challenges had emerged. Climate change had amplified human displacement, threatening the right to education. Digitalisation had created both opportunities but also exacerbated inequalities and blurred the boundaries of privacy and data protection. More needed to be done to strengthen access to lifelong learning opportunities. The report was timely, and the analysis and insights contained were critical to advance collective action to further promote education rights.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization had embarked in the evolving right to education initiative, investigating how rights and obligations could be further reinforced to foster implementation and ensure the right to education to all throughout life. Each incoming mandate holder to the right to education should carry out a visit to the Organization. Education should not be reduced to schooling. The right to education extended to apply to all ages and across all times and spaces. It was in this spirit that the Organization had been strengthening the lifelong learning dimension and advancing the rights agenda in the context of a series of inter-governmental meetings.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization was fully committed to, not only protect, and enforce, but also to expand and strengthen the right to education throughout life in all its dimensions. The Special Rapporteur’s views on expanding education throughout life were fully supported by the Organization and it had been working to this end for a considerable amount of time.
Discussion
In the ensuing discussion, many speakers, among other things, said education was a fundamental right. It was the most effective form of investment in the fight against poverty and contributed to advancing the economy and building human capital. It prevented children from engaging in hatred, violence and extremism. It was also crucial for empowering vulnerable groups. Some speakers expressed support for rethinking the right to education as a common good. Guaranteeing education was an ethical and legal duty.
Many challenges remained in guaranteeing education for all. Achievements in schools in certain areas remained low. The access of girls to education remained lower than that of boys, particularly in rural areas, and the COVID-19 pandemic had exacerbated this. Speakers condemned restrictions to access to education for women and girls, and expressed concerns about the growing digital divide between developing and developed nations. The development of artificial intelligence opened opportunities but also challenges regarding education that needed to be addressed.
Several speakers noted that there had been numerous attacks on education facilities, which had long-lasting consequences on students. States were encouraged to implement the Safe Schools Declaration, and military groups were urged to refrain from attacking education facilities. Some speakers also expressed concern about the rise of bullying in schools. The right to education included the right to be safe in education. Parents and legal guardians had a role to play in creating a safe learning environment. Ending violence and hate speech in and around schools required a multi-faceted approach. School children who were victims of bullying needed mental health support and safe spaces where discrimination was not possible.
Children affected by crises such as conflicts, climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic needed education support. Two-thirds of children were unable to read. Concerns were expressed regarding insufficient funding for education. States needed to uphold their commitments to ensuring inclusive and quality education for all children. Some speakers called on States to exert efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal of education for all. A new social contract on education was needed.
E-learning platforms were needed to overcome challenges in accessing education in remote areas. States needed to promote inclusive, equitable education for persons from vulnerable and marginalised groups. Opportunities for lifelong learning needed to be made available to all, including women. Women who had had their learning opportunities cut short needed a second chance. Comprehensive sexual education was important. Non-formal education also played an important role, providing young people with skills to solve problems and providing increased opportunities to access education. Technical and vocational training was also important, one speaker said, noting that there were challenges to accessing such education for people in vulnerable groups. States needed to promote vocational training as a catalyst for sustainable development. Further, digital education was important in this regard.
Speakers reaffirmed their commitment to the Sustainable Development Agenda, including the right to education. They committed to dialogue with States on promoting education to advance human rights. There was a need to prioritise environmental education.
Some speakers presented national measures to promote the right to education, including strategic plans for cooperation on scientific research and education, development of more efficient education systems, legislation and funding promoting access to education for all and lifelong learning, policies and bodies for monitoring the use of digital technologies and artificial intelligence in education, centres supporting access of persons with disabilities to education, increased government spending in education, and reforms of education curricula and school facilities.
Questions were asked on measures to ensure that learners had access to technologies in a safe digital environment, on measures to promote access to digital technologies for developing States, on measures to promote access to education in small island nations affected by climate change, on responses to discriminatory actions by States regarding access to education, on how to boost cooperation between local and national stakeholders on access to education, on means of raising funds for education, on measures to prevent reversals in the right to education for all, on methods of strengthening the role of non-formal education, on policies for informing children regarding their right to education, and on the Special Rapporteur’s forthcoming goals for her mandate.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the information media; not an official record.
English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
