Entertainment impact analysis monitor

courtesy : Entertainment impact analysis monitor

 Partners and sources of information

Field presences need support from a functioning, reliable network of actors with the relevant expertise and mandate to monitor women’s rights effectively. There is a great variety of such actors, ranging from national mechanisms for the advancement of women to community-based, grass-roots associations, United Nations entities (e.g., UN Women, UNICEF, UNFPA, WHO and UNESCO), human rights mechanisms on women’s rights at the international, regional and national levels, organizations
managing shelters for survivors of human trafficking or violence against women, police units specialized in investigating sexual violence, women human rights defenders (WHRDs), academic institutions researching women’s rights, health workers, journalists, gender units within executive bodies, national observatories on gender equality, platforms and networks working on women’s rights-related issues,
and many more in addition to field presences’ “standard” sources, which often also provide goodquality information on women’s rights (for guidance on the use of the terms “victims” and “survivors”). In each area of women’s human rights that field presences monitor, they need to identify and engage with relevant stakeholders, who can be sources of information, partners in monitoring activities or duty bearers. They can be institutions and collective entities or individuals (e.g., midwives, social workers, women’s caucuses in parliaments, or women’s rights activists).

 Challenges

When monitoring women’s human rights, human rights officers (HROs) face a number of challenges, some of which are specific to women while others are more general. They include:
Locating, accessing and approaching women affected by violations and, in some contexts, women in general. This may entail particular challenges in the case of groups of women facing multiple or intersecting forms of discrimination, or when contact may be difficult because of cultural barriers, or when these survivors live in remote areas.
The under-reporting of some violations, such as sexual violence, owing to fear of retaliation or the social stigma attached to victims of such violations (for guidance on the use of “victims” and “survivors.
Interviewing victims of violations, especially when social stigma is attached to them.
Inability of victims of sexual violence to identify their perpetrators, especially in the context of armed conflict and following trauma.
In some contexts, women interviewed by HROs tend to talk about violations affecting others (e.g., family members or the community) and do not report violations concerning themselves unless prompted with specific questions about their own situation.
Monitoring violations that take place in the private sphere.
Monitoring without endangering or exposing witnesses or sources, their families or communities to the risk of harm or retaliation, and without exposing the victim to further stigmatization and isolation.
As in all cases where HROs interact with survivors of trauma, the risk – whilst gathering information, and in particular while interviewing – of re-traumatizing women who have survived a traumatic experience (see Chapter 12 on Trauma and self-care ).
Lack of services to which to refer victims of all forms of gender-based violence, including sexual violence – such as legal assistance, shelters, psycho-social support, economic assistance, sexual and reproductive health care and other rehabilitation services.
Little or no access to gender-sensitive judicial or non-judicial remedies for women victims of human rights violations.
Misunderstandings and complications in relationships with organizations working in this field, which may cut off or limit collaboration with field presences (e.g. humanitarian organizations providing health care and support for survivors of sexual violence).
Little or no reliable information regarding the situation with women’s rights.
HROs’ limited knowledge of women’s rights issues and gender concepts; their own gender stereotypes, biases, perceptions and behaviours (e.g., discomfort, embarrassment, unfamiliarity),
particularly when monitoring certain types of violations that disproportionally affect women (e.g, sexual and reproductive health and rights, sexual and other gender-based violence), and their minimization of violations taking place in the private sphere, or violations against girls.
When prioritizing the violations to monitor, field presences may focus more on violations primarily affecting individual men as opposed to those impacting on large numbers of women (e.g., arbitrary detention, torture, summary executions and violations of freedom of expression, as opposed to forced displacement or violations of the right to an adequate standard of living, in its different ramifications).

#Entertainment impact analysis monitor

#family members or the community

#rehabilitation services

#isbc