Skip to main content

Autore: Patrizia Fabbri

Lettera all’ONU per il riconoscimento dell’apartheid di genere come crimine contro l’umanità

Alla Sesta Commissione
Assemblea Generale delle Nazioni Unite

l’Associazione C.I.S.D.A. (Coordinamento Italiano a Sostegno delle Donne Afghane) con la presente nota intende fornire un contributo ai lavori in corso nell’ambito della Sesta Commissione dell’Assemblea Generale delle Nazioni Unite sulla Convenzione dei Crimini contro L’Umanità, per chiedere che venga presa in esame l’introduzione del crimine di “apartheid di genere” nella proposta di Convenzione sulla prevenzione e la punizione dei crimini contro l’Umanità.

Vi inviamo pertanto in allegato la nostra analisi e proposta di definizione del reato di “apartheid di genere”, affinché la stessa possa essere presa in considerazione nelle modalità ritenute più opportune. Tale proposta, che vuole avere una valenza generale per ogni situazione che in essa vi rientri, trova però la sua origine nella crescente consapevolezza di governi, istituzioni internazionali, Associazioni della società civile ed attiviste per i diritti umani che ciò che si sta compiendo in Afghanistan è un crimine contro l’umanità la cui tipologia non è ancora pienamente riconosciuta dai Trattati esistenti e dalle Convenzioni internazionali.

Come emerge dal più recente Report dello Special Rapporteur sull’Afghanistan del Human Rights Council del giugno 2024, il Paese rappresenta il caso più emblematico di applicazione di un sistema pervasivo, metodico ed istituzionalizzato di oppressione e segregazione delle donne e delle ragazze, rafforzato da editti e politiche che le sanzionano violentemente e impongono privazioni dei diritti fondamentali. Le testimonianze delle attiviste per i diritti umani che operano nel Paese e con le quali CISDA è in contatto ci riportano lo stato di grave depressione mentale e il maggior numero di suicidi delle donne come unica possibilità di fuga da una vita condannata alla paura e alla reclusione.

Uniamo la nostra voce a quella del Relatore Speciale nel ritenere che l’inclusione del crimine di apartheid di genere nel “Trattato sulla prevenzione e la punizione dei crimini contro l’Umanità” possa sostenere la comunità internazionale in una vigorosa azione di condanna e messa al bando di coloro – individui, governi di fatto, stati e regimi politici – che applicano violazioni sistematiche e istituzionalizzate di genere.

Il C.I.S.D.A. opera dal 1999 a stretto contatto con Associazioni di attiviste – tra le quali la principale è R.A.W.A. (Associazione Rivoluzionaria delle Donne Afghane) che, nel proprio Paese, attiva da decenni, in clandestinità, progetti umanitari a sostegno di donne, bambini e della popolazione civile in stato di necessità. Le attiviste di R.A.W.A. affiancano al lavoro umanitario la denuncia politica sulle gravi violazioni dei diritti umani e sui crimini commessi non solo dall’attuale regime dei talebani ma, – a partire dalla fine degli anni ‘70, – anche dai fondamentalisti e dai signori della guerra che hanno ricoperto incarichi di rilievo nei precedenti governi della Repubblica Islamica. E’ a partire da quel periodo che sono iniziati, e continuano tuttora, i finanziamenti e il sostegno da parte di potenze regionali e internazionali a criminali che hanno preso il controllo dell’intera società afghana per più di quaranta anni rendendo impossibile lo sviluppo di una società laica e democratica e un processo di reale autodeterminazione per il popolo afghano.

Per C.I.S.D.A. e per le donne di RAWA, l’apartheid di genere si sviluppa in Afghanistan proprio da questi fatti drammatici ed è frutto di una violenza sistemica che scaturisce dalla drammatica sinergia tra fondamentalismo religioso, conflitti armati, corruzione dilagante negli organi preposti al governo di fatto del Paese, traffico di armi, droghe ed esseri umani, cambiamento climatico, crisi umanitarie, migrazioni forzate e terrorismo.

Ciò che avviene oggi nell’Afghanistan governato dal regime talebano è ancor più grave per la comunità internazionale in quanto si assiste ad una normalizzazione in atto della condizione di totale negazione dei diritti umani nei confronti del popolo afghano e in particolare delle donne, delle bambine e degli individui LGBTQI+.

Per questi motivi, plaudiamo all’impegno e alla leadership del Consiglio per i Diritti Umani delle Nazioni Unite nel riconoscimento e la condanna a livello internazionale del grave crimine di apartheid in un’ottica di genere, consolidando così per tutti gli individui nel mondo, indipendentemente dal genere, il principio di eguali diritti tra donne e uomini sancito dalla Dichiarazione Universale dei diritti Umani delle Nazioni Unite.

In conformità alle raccomandazioni dello Special Rapporteur sull’Afghanistan del Human Rights Council, riteniamo però che tale processo non possa essere disgiunto dalla necessità che gli Stati membri delle Nazioni Unite non riconoscano in nessun modo il governo di fatto dell’Afghanistan, mettano al bando il fondamentalismo talebano con provvedimenti urgenti, impediscano finanziamenti e rifornimenti militari da parte di Paesi amici, estromettano rappresentanti del governo di fatto da incontri della diplomazia internazionale e non li convochino alle riunioni delle Nazioni Unite. Azioni queste che legittimano un regime che continua a violare i diritti umani delle donne e gli obblighi legali internazionali dell’Afghanistan.

La proposta che presentiamo in allegato è stata redatta con la collaborazione giuridica della Dot.ssa Laura Guercio, (avvocato e professoressa, attualmente SG Universities Network for Children in Armed Conflict, membro del Consiglio dell’European Law Institute, esperta OSCE) e della Dot.tssa Paolina Massidda, (avvocato penalista internazionale specializzata in crimini di genere e crimini che colpiscono i bambini. Avvocato principale dell’Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OPCV) indipendente presso la CPI. Membro del comitato consultivo dell’UNETCHAC)

Distinti saluti
C.I.S.D.A. (Coordinamento Italiano a Sostegno delle Donne Afghane)

LETTERA del 17 dicembre 2024 di Arnold N. Pronto, segretario della VI Commissione dell’ONU che accusa ricevuta della documentazione inviata da CISDA

Letter to the UN for the recognition of gender apartheid as a crime against humanity

To the Sixth Commission

U.N. General Assembly

 

With this note C.I.S.D.A (Italian Committee Supporting Afghani Women) would like to contribute to the work of the Sixth Commission of the U.N. General Assembly on the Convention on Crimes against Humanity, asking that  the introduction of  the crime of “Gender Apartheid” could be  considered within the drafting of the Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Humanity.

We therefore send you our analysis and proposal for the definition of the crime of gender apartheid, hoping that it may be considered in the ways which are deemed appropriate . This proposal has a general scope, for any situation  in which it can be applicable, but it stems from the growing awareness of governments, international institutions, grassroots associations and activists that what is now happening in Afghanistan is a crime against humanity, whose nature is not yet fully recognized in existing Treaties and International Conventions.

The report of June 2024 by the Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan of the Human Rights  Council describes this country as the clearest case of a pervasive, methodic and institutionalized system of oppression and segregation of women and girls, where rules and policies deprive them of  their fundamental human rights  and violently punish them . C.I.S.D.A. is in contact with human rights activists in the country and they report severe mental depression in many women and a high number of suicides among them as the only way to escape a life of fear and reclusion.

We add our voice to the Special Rapporteur’s: we believe that including the crime of gender apartheid in the Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Humanity can support the international community in a  strong action to condemn and ostracize whoever – individuals, de facto governments, states or political regimes – creates a system of institutionalized gender oppression.

Since 1999, C.I.S.D.A. has worked together with activist organizations (the most important being R.A.W.A., Revolutionary Association of Afghani Women) who in hiding within Afghanistan have developed for decades projects supporting women, children and civil population in need. These activists combine their humanitarian work with the political denunciation of the severe violation of human rights and of crimes committed in Afghanistan; now by the Taliban and, before them, by fundamentalist groups and warlords who were in important social positions in previous governments of the Islamic Republic. Since the 1970s, regional and international powers have supported and financed criminals who have taken over control of the entire Afghani society for more than 40 years now, which has made it impossible for a lay and  democratic society to develop.

C.I.S.D.A and the women of R.A.W.A. believe that gender apartheid has developed in Afghanistan because of these dramatic events. We believe that it stems from the systemic violence resulting from the tragic combination of religious fundamentalism, armed conflicts, widespread corruption in the de facto government of the country, arms  drugs and human trafficking, climate change, humanitarian crises, forced migrations and terrorism.

What happens now in Taliban-run Afghanistan  is even more serious for the international community, because we are witnessing  the normalization of the  total deprivation of human rights of the Afghani people, women and LGBTQI+ individuals.

For all these reasons we praise the commitment and  leadership of the U.N. Human Rights Council to widen the Convention for the Prevention and Repression of Crimes against Humanity with the recognition and international condemnation of gender apartheid : in this way the principle of equal rights of women and men stated in the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights will be enshrined for every individual in the world, irrespective of their gender.

In line with the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur for Afghanistan of the Human Rights Council, however, we believe that the introduction of the crime of gender apartheid cannot be disjointed from the necessity of UN State Members to not recognize in any way the de facto government of Afghanistan , take urgent steps to ban Taliban fundamentalism, prevent  friendly States  from funding and supplying weapons there, exclude the representatives of the de facto government from international diplomatic  relationships and not invite them to United Nation meetings. Doing this would legitimate a regime that keeps violating women human rights and the international legal obligations of Afghanistan.

  • We enclose our proposal for the definition of gender apartheid , which has been drafted thanks to the legal expertise of Ms Laura Guercio, Lawyer and Professor, currently SG Universities Network for Children in Armed Conflict, Member of the Council of the European Law Institute, OSCE Expert
  • Ms Paolina Massidda, International Criminal Lawyer specialised in gender crimes and crimes affecting children. Principal Counsel of the independent Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OPCV) at the ICC. Member of the Advisory Board of the UNETCHAC.

 

Yours sincerely

C.I.S.D.A.

 

 

LETTER dated December 17, 2024 from Arnold N. Pronto, Secretary of the UN Commission VI acknowledging receipt of the documentation sent by CISDA

The Crime of Gender Apartheid as Crime Against Humanity

Gender equality is, first and foremost, a human right. It implies that women, men, boys and girls of all classes and races participate as equals and have equal value.

From a legal standpoint, it is defined as the principle that all people, regardless of their gender, must have the same rights, duties, opportunities, and access to resources.
This principle is enshrined in various international conventions, including:

  • The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1979. CEDAW is considered one of the fundamental treaties for the protection and promotion of women’s rights. Article 1 defines “discrimination against women” as any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on sex that has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise by women, regardless of their marital status, on the basis of equality with men, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in political, economic, social, cultural, civil, or any other field.
  • The European Convention of Human Rights signed in Rome in 1950, where article 14  states the prohibition of discrimination based also on sex, “ birth or any other condition” and secures   the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention to every person without distinction.
  • The Equal Remuneration Convention (ILO – Convention No. 100), adopted by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in 1951, which requires member states to ensure equal pay for work of equal value, without discrimination based on gender.

International conventions place a clear responsibility on States not only to legislate in favour of gender equality but also to adopt all necessary measures to eliminate de facto discrimination. This includes access to justice, the availability of effective remedies, and the possibility of obtaining adequate reparations and assurances of non-repetition.

Why is the codification of the crime of gender apartheid necessary?

The concept of “gender apartheid” is not yet codified in international law as a crime, and the legal recognition of said crime will address what is a major gap in international law.

The importance of recognizing and defining “gender apartheid” as a specific crime against humanity, distinct from the crime of apartheid enshrined in the Rome Statute, lies in several fundamental considerations related to the protection of human rights, international justice, and the fight against systematic discrimination.

The crime of apartheid, as defined in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (article 7 (1) (j)), focuses on racial discrimination. However, the dynamics of gender-based discrimination have unique characteristics that require specific legal attention. Human rights violations based on gender, such as sexual violence, rape, denial of reproductive rights, and gender segregation, are not always adequately addressed under the simple notion of racial apartheid.

A crime of “gender apartheid” would recognize the extent and severity of gender-based discrimination, specifically addressing the systematic violations affecting girls, women and gender non-conforming individuals, in particular LGBTQI+ people.

Incorporating “gender apartheid” into the corpus of  crimes  against humanity would strengthen the international legal framework, enabling more effective investigation and prosecution of crimes based on gender discrimination. It will increase efforts to combat institutionalised regimes of systematic oppression and domination imposed on grounds of gender. Indeed, the legal recognition would recognise the unique type of victimisation and expand opportunities for victims to seek justice and for international institutions to take actions against States, governments or entities that use and perpetuate such systems of oppression. Furthermore, it would create a legal precedent that could be used to build case law and provide means to address new forms of gender discrimination emerging in the contemporary world.

For instance, in Afghanistan, the historical context of gender discrimination and the continuation of oppressive practices under recent regimes illustrate how current actions are part of a prolonged system of gender apartheid.

Proposed definition for the crime of Gender Apartheid as a crime against humanity

“Gender apartheid means any act, policy, practice, or omission that, in a systematic and institutionalized  manner, is committed by an individual, a state, organization, entity or group, with the purpose or effect of establishing, maintaining, or perpetuating the domination of one gender over another, through institutionalized segregation, oppression, or discrimination in political, economic, social, cultural, educational, professional or any other area of public and private life”.

These acts include, but are not limited to:

  • a) The enactment of laws or policies that deny, limit, or reduce the fundamental rights of individuals based on their gender;
  • b) The use of physical or psychological violence, arbitrary detention, or any other form of coercion to impose the control of one gender over another;
  • c) The systematic segregation and limitation of access to resources, education, employment, or political participation based on gender;
  • d) The promotion of ideologies or practices that justify or legitimize the domination and/or oppression of one gender over another”.

Explanation of the Proposal

The definition of gender apartheid in the proposed formula—acts, policies, or practices aimed at perpetuating the domination of one gender over another—is consistent with the legal understanding of apartheid as defined by the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (1973) and expanded upon in the Rome Statute (1998), which includes the crime of apartheid as a crime against humanity. These legal frameworks define apartheid as institutionalized domination and systematic oppression, typically based on race. The proposed gender-based expansion of this principle is justified, as gender discrimination has historically been a pervasive and institutionalized form of oppression.

Key elements in this definition are institutionalized segregation, oppression, and discrimination, which have been core features of historical apartheid regimes. In this context, gender apartheid reflects policies that systematically exclude individuals based on gender from full participation in social, economic, and political life, reinforcing structures of dominance.

The listed acts—such as discriminatory laws, the use of violence to impose control, and systematic segregation in access to resources—correspond to similar practices recognized in racial apartheid systems. Each of these practices can be seen in gender-discriminatory regimes, both historically and presently, such as the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, where women have been denied access to education, employment, and freedom of movement. Said actions, when committed in a systematic and institutionalized manner, bear striking resemblances to the practices of apartheid.

The proposal emphasizes that said acts may be committed not only by State actors but also by non-state actors, such as organized groups, which reflects a growing recognition in international law of the role that non-state actors can play in committing and perpetuating egregious violations of human rights. The inclusion of omissions as a form of criminal conduct—where authorities fail to act to prevent or punish gender-based discrimination or violence—further broadens the scope of accountability. This aligns with the jurisprudence from cases like Opuz v. Turkey (2009) and Talpis v. Italy (2017), where the European Court of Human Rights found that a State’s failure to protect women from domestic violence violated human rights.

The concept of gender apartheid can be situated within the broader framework of intersectionality, which examines how various forms of oppression—such as race, class, and gender—interact and compound each other. Legal scholars such as Catharine MacKinnon have long argued that the oppression of women is systematic and should be understood as a form of political subordination akin to apartheid. In this sense, the proposed formula builds on feminist legal theory, which views gender discrimination as a form of social and legal stratification.

Moreover, the proposal aligns with international legal trends toward broadening the scope of crimes against humanity to include gender-based crimes. For instance, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) have recognized sexual violence as constituting both crimes against humanity and acts of genocide when systematically used as a tool of oppression. These precedents support the inclusion of systematic gender-based discrimination as a form of apartheid.

1.         SUBJECTS OF THE CRIME

  • Active Subject

The inclusion of both individuals and collective entities, such as States and organized groups, aligns with developments in international criminal law, which recognises the liability of  individuals for crimes against humanity, while also recognizing the role that institutions or entities may play in enabling and enforcing such crimes. This dual recognition allows for accountability across both individual and systematic levels. In gender apartheid, both political regimes and cultural or religious groups can exert significant control over societal norms, and this proposal allows for a nuanced approach to prosecuting crimes committed by such entities.

  • Passive Subject

The definition of the passive subject as being any group of people identified by their gender, including women and gender non-conforming individuals, reflects modern understandings of gender as a social construct. This is particularly important as it expands the protections beyond the traditional binary of men and women, addressing discrimination and oppression faced by the LGBTQI+ community, which has been systematically oppressed in various contexts, from restrictive laws on gender expression to violent attacks.

2.         CONDUCT

The conduct refers to deliberate actions, policies, practices, or omissions that institutionalize and perpetuate systematic discrimination and oppression based on gender. The conduct should aim at creating, maintaining, or strengthening a system of domination and/or oppression of one gender over another.

a) Element of the conduct

The conduct should be part of a continuous system of discrimination and/or oppression. Such conduct can manifest through the following acts:

  1. Discriminatory Laws and Policies:

    • Laws restricting civil and political rights, such as denying women or other gender groups the right to vote, run for office, or participate in public life. For example, laws that prevent women or gender non-conforming individuals from holding certain positions or entering specific professions.
    • Policies limiting access to education and training, including educational practices that discriminate based on gender, preventing women or gender non-conforming individuals from accessing education or specific fields of study.
    • Laws enforcing dress codes or behaviour norms based on gender, such as requiring women to cover parts of their bodies or prohibiting them from driving or traveling without a male escort.

The adoption of discriminatory laws and policies serve as clear examples of systematic and institutionalized forms of gender apartheid, aimed at controlling, segregating, and oppressing individuals based on gender. These laws and policies often reflect deep-seated societal norms and values, further entrenching gender inequalities in both public and private life. In particular,

  1. Discriminatory Economic and Labour Practices:

    • Practices limiting access to employment and economic resources, such as wage gaps between genders for equal work or the systematic exclusion of women or gender non-conforming individuals from specific industries.
    • Laws and practices preventing women or other gender groups from owning, inheriting, or controlling property and economic resources.
    • Gender-based labour segregation, which relegates a gender to lower-paying or less-respected jobs.

  1. Social and Cultural Control:

    • Enforcement of traditional gender roles, promoting norms that confine women or other gender groups to domestic roles, limiting their autonomy and self-determination. This could include social pressure for forced marriage or motherhood.
    • Gender-based violence as a tool of control, such as tolerance or promotion of domestic violence, female genital mutilation, or violent “correction” of gender non-conforming individuals.

Gender-based violence is a powerful tool used to enforce gender hierarchies and control women and gender non-conforming individuals. This violence can take many forms, including domestic violence, sexual assault, female genital mutilation (FGM), and so-called “corrective” violence against those who do not conform to traditional gender roles. In many cases, these acts of violence are tolerated, normalized, or even promoted within society, further entrenching the subordination of one gender over another. This type of violence is not just an expression of individual aggression but is often condoned by societal norms or practices that view women and gender minorities as inferior or in need of control. It represents a severe form of gender apartheid, where violence is systematically used to enforce gender subordination and deny individuals their right to safety, autonomy, and equality.

  1. Systemic Exclusion from Rights and Services:

    • Denial of access to essential healthcare services, including reproductive health, sexually transmitted disease prevention, and mental health services.
    • Exclusion from justice systems that deny women or gender non-conforming individuals the opportunity to seek legal redress for crimes or rights violations, such as courts not recognizing their testimony or applying stricter proof standards for gender-based crimes.
    • Deprivation of personal freedom, including restrictions on movement, political organization, and participation in protests.

Systemic exclusion from essential rights and services is a key pillar of gender apartheid, where individuals—particularly women and gender non-conforming persons—are deliberately denied access to critical services and legal protections. These exclusions reinforce and sustain gender inequality by making it difficult or impossible for marginalized groups to live freely, access healthcare, seek justice, and participate fully in society. The following examples show three crucial areas where systemic exclusion manifests, namley healthcare, justice systems, and personal freedom.

  1. Propaganda and Hate Speech:

    • Promotion of ideologies that assert gender inferiority through media, propaganda, or political rhetoric, justifying discrimination, domination and /or oppression and spreading harmful stereotypes.
    • Normalization of gender discrimination, domination and/or oppression through education, popular culture, or official statements from political or religious leaders.

Propaganda and hate speech are powerful tools used to sustain gender apartheid by promoting ideologies that justify the subordination of one gender to another. Through the deliberate dissemination of harmful stereotypes, these tactics reinforce societal norms that legitimize gender-based discrimination and oppression. Such ideologies are often embedded in media, political rhetoric, education systems, and popular culture, fostering an environment where inequality is normalized and even celebrated. Propaganda and hate speech maintain gender apartheid through the promotion of gender inferiority and the normalization of gender discrimination.

b) Forms of the conduct

  • Direct imposition: the conduct may be directly imposed through legal or physical threat or force, such as enforcing discriminatory laws or using violence to uphold gender norms.
  • Institutional support or tolerance: the lack of action to repress discriminatory practices or policies may also integrate the conduct when a state, government or institution indirectly support gender discrimination, domination and/or oppression.
  • Systemic control: the conduct can be part of a systemic control framework that includes not only laws and policies but also selective enforcement, media control, and education to maintain gender superiority, domination and/or oppression.

c) Impact of the conduct

The goal of gender apartheid is to maintain and reinforce a gender hierarchy that perpetuates inequality and oppression so that individuals of a certain gender remain disadvantaged in all aspects of social, political, and economic life. The effects of the acts include:

  • Creation of a system of chronic structural inequality, causing psychological, physical, economic, and social harm to the oppressed group.
  • Perpetuation of gender stereotypes, which justify subordination and discrimination, causing  a long-term cycle of disempowerment and exclusion.

The conduct of gender apartheid has profound and far-reaching consequences on society, with its ultimate aim being the reinforcement and maintenance of a rigid gender hierarchy. This system ensures that certain genders, typically women and gender non-conforming individuals, remain disadvantaged in all areas of life—socially, politically, and economically. The impacts of this conduct are devastating, entrenching inequality and perpetuating cycles of oppression and disempowerment. In particular:

1.         Chronic Structural Inequality

Gender apartheid creates a system of chronic structural inequality that manifests in various forms of harm—psychological, physical, economic, and social. This structural inequality is woven into the fabric of society, ensuring that women and gender minorities face systemic barriers to opportunities and resources, while the dominant gender group (typically men) benefits from sustained privilege and power.

  • Psychological Harm: The constant reinforcement of inferiority and subordination causes long-term psychological damage.
  • Physical Harm: Gender apartheid also directly results in physical harm, particularly through the use of violence to enforce gender norms and maintain control. This can include domestic violence, honour killings, forced marriages, female genital mutilation, and physical punishment for gender non-conformity.
  • Economic Harm: Economic disempowerment is a critical component of gender apartheid, where women and gender minorities are systematically denied access to education, employment, and economic resources.
  • Social Harm: Gender apartheid fosters exclusion from public life, with women and gender minorities often barred from political participation, decision-making roles, and leadership positions. This exclusion leads to the marginalization of entire groups from societal progress and development.

2.         Long-Term Cycle of Disempowerment and Exclusion

The conduct of gender apartheid establishes a long-term cycle of disempowerment and exclusion, in which marginalized genders are systematically denied opportunities to escape oppression. Each generation inherits and perpetuates the inequality and stereotypes of the previous one, reinforcing the idea that the current gender hierarchy is natural or unchangeable.

  • Intergenerational Impact: Gender apartheid affects not only those living under it but also future generations.
  • Social and Economic Development: The long-term exclusion of women and gender minorities from critical roles in society also impedes overall social and economic development.. Studies have shown that increasing gender equality leads to greater economic prosperity, as more individuals are able to participate fully in the workforce and contribute to societal advancement.

 

  1. SUBJECTIVE ELEMENT: INTENT AND AWARENESS

a) Mens Rea (Intent)

The subjective element of the crime of gender apartheid goes beyond mere intent to discriminate. It involves an awareness and acceptance of the gravity and systematic nature of the discrimination, with the intention to maintain or strengthen the subordination of a group of people based on their gender. This means a conscious will to dominate, control, or subjugate a specific group based on gender. Typically, this involves maintaining a social and political structure that perpetuates the superiority of one gender—often male over female—through laws, policies, or practices that place one gender in a subordinated or marginalized position, depriving them of fundamental rights and opportunities.

Perpetrators must be aware that their actions or policies will result in discrimination, domination or oppression, and suffering of a group of people based on gender. Even if it is not the primary intent, the perpetrators must accept the resulting discrimination and inequality as inevitable or acceptable.

Therefore, mens rea, or subjective element, involves a specific awareness and acceptance of the gravity and systemic nature of the discrimination, with the intention to maintain or reinforce the subordination of a gender-based group.

b) Proof of the Subjective Element

To establish the subjective element in a judicial context, various forms of evidence can be used, including:

  • Official documentation: Laws, regulations, decrees, and official policies that explicitly or implicitly demonstrate the intention to perpetuate gender discrimination. These documents can serve as direct evidence of the intent to create and/or maintain a discriminatory system.
  • Public statements: Speeches, declarations, or other communicative acts by the perpetrators that express the intention to sustain a system of gender supremacy. These statements can highlight the perpetrator’s awareness of the effects of their actions and their deliberate intent to continue such practices.
  • Institutional practices: Evidence that state institutions or other organizations consistently implement discriminatory practices against a specific gender group. This can include records of how policies are applied in practice, demonstrating a systematic approach to gender-based exclusion and inequality.

 

Proposal by C.I.S.D.A. (Italian Coordination for the Support of Afghan Women) sent to the Sixth Commission of the General Assembly of the United Nations with the letter that you can read here, drafted with the help of the legal experts :

  • Ms Laura Guercio, Lawyer and Professor, currently SG Universities Network for Children in Armed Conflict, Member of the Council of the European Law Institute, OSCE Expert
  • Ms Paolina Massidda, International Criminal Lawyer specialised in gender crimes and crimes affecting children. Principal Counsel of the independent Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OPCV) at the ICC. Member of the Advisory Board of the UNETCHAC.

Afghanistan, Shakiba: “I Talebani hanno paura delle donne”

Articolo pubblicato da Luce il 30 ottobre 2024

Shakiba, esponente della Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (Rawa), non ha dubbi: “La condizione delle donne afghane dopo il ritorno al potere dei talebani, il 15 agosto 2021, è diventata critica e caotica. Il punto è che ai talebani fanno paura le donne che alzano la voce“. L’attivista torna quindi a puntare i riflettori su una situazione, quella femminile in Afghanistan, che definire drammatica è riduttivo.

Shakiba, di cui non conosciamo il cognome e l’aspetto per questioni di sicurezza, è stata intervistata dall’agenzia Dire dopo la sua partecipazione a un panel nell’ambito del Festival Sabir a Roma, dedicato alla campagna internazionale che chiedere alle Nazioni Unite di aggiungere il reato di apartheid di genere tra i crimini contro l’umanità. L’attivista spiega le ragioni per cui l’Afghanistan è tra i Paesi simbolo per testimoniare la gravità di questo reato: “Alle donne è stato portato via tutto: il loro lavoro, la loro professione, la possibilità di accedere alle università e di andare a scuola. Non possono neanche andare nei parchi o nei bagni pubblici e devono viaggiare solo se accompagnate da un familiare maschio”, afferma.

Vietato parlare ad alta voce

L’ultimo affondo ai diritti femminili, già ridotti all’osso, è stata la dichiarazione del ministro per la Promozione delle virtù e la prevenzione dei vizi, Mohammad Khalid Hanafi, secondo cui alle donne è vietato recitare ad alta voce preghiere o versetti del Corano in casa, davanti ad altre donne adulte. “Se non possono pregare ad alta voce – ha detto il politico – come possiamo pensare che possano cantare?”. L’applicazione delle nuove norme, ha chiarito il ministro, “sarà implementata gradualmente”. Affermazioni che hanno scatenato una nuova ondata di critiche e polemiche a livello internazionale, soprattutto da associazioni per i diritti umani. Sebbene il ministro si riferisca alla preghiera, la sensazione è che il provvedimento si sommi alle disposizioni di agosto, secondo cui le donne non possono parlare ad alta voce in pubblico e mostrare il viso fuori delle mura domestiche.

L’emittente televisiva Amu Tv cita la testimonianza di Samira, un’ostetrica di Herat, secondo cui “negli ultimi mesi i controlli da parte dei talebani si sono intensificati. Non ci permettono di parlare ai posti di blocco quando andiamo a lavorare. E nelle cliniche ci viene detto di non discutere di questioni mediche con i parenti maschi”. Inoltre, alle donne è consentito studiare solo fino ai 12 anni. Un’altra testata locale, Tolo News, riporta i commenti seguiti alle dichiarazioni di Hanafi da parte di alcuni teologi che incoraggiano, invece, il governo di Kabul a permettere alle donne di studiare, evidenziando che il Corano lo consente, e che andrebbe a beneficio dell’intera società. Il discorso dell’esponente di governo, inoltre, è stato diffuso in formato audio perché la scorsa settimana il ministero ha adottato un decreto che vieta la trasmissione televisiva di immagini di esseri umani.

Le donne afghane protestano contro i talebani al potere

Le prime a resistere e a scendere in piazza contro i talebani

Shakiba riferisce di una realtà in cui “le donne che hanno provato a resistere alle decisioni dei talebani sono state torturate, arrestate, incarcerate, persino uccise. Ci sono così tante storie di donne picchiate a morte o scomparse. Coloro che avevano impieghi in polizia, nelle istituzioni di governo o all’interno delle ong sono state arrestate e spesso uccise segretamente. Le famiglie non hanno mai riavuto i corpi”. Questo ha costretto moltissime persone a lasciare il Paese, “soprattutto le donne – prosegue l’esponente di Rawa – perché non si può vivere in un paese guidato da fondamentalisti contrari al progresso, ai diritti umani e alla pace”. L’accanimento dei talebani contro le donne, secondo Shakiba, dipende dal fatto che “sono state le prime a resistere e scendere in piazza a Kabul per protestare contro il loro ritorno”. E spiega: “Nei 20 anni precedenti, avevano visto i talebani bombardare le case della gente comune e farsi esplodere negli ospedali, nelle scuole, o nei luoghi frequentati da donne e bambini. Le afghane sanno che i talebani hanno paura di loro, delle loro proteste, della loro istruzione, della loro coscienza politica”.

Le reponsabilità occidentali

L’esponente della Rawa cita anche le responsabilità della presenza Nato a guida americana in Afghanistan: “Dopo 20 anni l’Occidente ha deluso gli afghani perché ha lasciato che i talebani tornassero al potere. Gli Stati Uniti hanno invaso e occupato il mio Paese con la scusa di combattere il fondamentalismo terrorista e liberare le donne, ma non hanno mai smesso di dare armi e milioni di dollari al peggior gruppo fondamentalista al mondo. Perché – si chiede Shakiba –. Washington e i suoi alleati non hanno sostenuto le forze democratiche e progressiste che davvero volevano il cambiamento? È stata una scelta politica sbagliata, che dura da oltre 40 anni”.

Pertanto, l’attivista denuncia: “Si parla di portare i talebani davanti alla Corte penale internazionale, bene, ma non deve restare su carta, deve essere fatto”. All’Europa e soprattutto all’Italia – che ad agosto ha nominato Sabrina Ugolino nuova ambasciatrice d’Italia in Afghanistan, che sarà operativa da Doha – chiede: “Supportate i movimenti come il nostro, ma anche tutti i movimenti politici di donne che stanno soffrendo le violenze, come quelle in Siria, facendo pressioni sui vostri governi e politici affinché taglino ogni sostegno ai fondamentalisti”. Infine, un cenno alla componente maschile della società afghana: “Ci sono tanti uomini dalla mentalità aperta, istruiti, democratici, che si oppongono all’oppressione subita dalle donne. Attraverso i social media si sono attivati in tanti modi, perché pubblicamente rischiano troppo: ai cortei indetti dalle donne, i talebani infatti sparano in aria per disperderle, ma se vedono degli uomini, gli sparano contro. Pensiamo che dovrebbero unirsi e alzare la voce tutti insieme. Se l’Afghanistan vuole cambiare, dobbiamo sollevarci tutti“.

The Taliban do not live on fundamentalism alone: among oppression, corruption, and a flood of money

It is well known: the Taliban government is sustained by aid from donor countries, particularly the United States, sent to Afghanistan.

Reports from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (Sigar) have shown this multiple times. Most of the aid arriving in the country is intercepted by the Taliban in various ways and retained, either peacefully or through coercion, for the direct support of the state apparatus and to foster loyalty and support among the officials who administer, maintain, and uphold the regime at various levels, especially in the most remote regions. The organizations responsible for distributing the aid lack either the capacity or the will to monitor or reject this diversion.

But how did the Taliban manage to establish this model of governance so quickly? In reality, the apparatus was already in place: the Afghan economy was already accustomed to surviving on external funding and corruption. During twenty years of U.S. dominance, the Islamic Republic had not developed an independent and self-sufficient economy because the U.S. policy had been to use “money as a weapon,” meaning flooding Afghanistan with enormous amounts of money to “keep terrorists and potential rebellions in check” without having to intervene directly with troops and weapons.

U.S. money and economic contracts enriched and empowered warlords and militia commanders, including the Taliban—some estimates suggest they received 10% of the funds—to discourage attacks on NATO convoys. U.S. money had thus permeated all levels of Afghan politics and society, perpetuating an environment conducive to embezzlement, fraud, and favoritism. Every government official, from the president to the low-ranking functionaries, took advantage of this to enrich themselves, and the entire system was sustained by corruption and bribes.

When the United States and the coalition left the country, everyone who had sustained themselves and grown rich through this system of corruption either fled Afghanistan or went into hiding, but nothing changed: only the beneficiaries shifted, replaced by the Taliban, their militants, and their supporters, who inserted themselves wherever they could to seize sources of income and wealth.

Thus, the taxes, bribes, and levies systematically and in large quantities demanded not only from wealthy NGOs and international institutions providing aid but also from the poorest strata of the hungry population and even the poorest women—those without husbands and jobs—enrich not so much the state coffers but the personal wealth of Taliban ministers and their affiliates, turning Afghanistan into a full-fledged kleptocratic state.

How do the Taliban generate their wealth? Primarily through taxes, “a tax system so rigorous and efficient that it has received praise from international agencies, but which is in reality a system of extortion carried out under their authority to consolidate their power, support the repressive machine, build madrasas and mosques, and promote the Talibanization of society, without providing any services to the population. It’s effectively an extortion system aimed at one of the most unfortunate populations on the planet,” explains Zan Times.

They also collect income through the issuance of various licenses and services for which they can charge official fees and unofficial bribes, such as for passports and ID cards. In 2022, between $800 and $3,000 was charged for a passport, bringing in a total of about $50 million in issuance fees. The cost of ID cards reached $5, a significant amount for more than half of Afghan citizens who live on less than $1.90 a day, and so far, the Taliban have issued around four million of them.

Taxes are also collected informally, through door-to-door visits, with imprisonment, threats, and acts of violence for non-payment of customs and tax duties, as well as new exorbitant taxes imposed on the private sector, which are unaffordable even for entrepreneurs.

And then there are the bribes demanded from women and their families. Thanks to laws restricting women’s freedoms, those in power can profit from the permits issued on a case-by-case basis. Restrictions on women traveling alone or abroad, the requirement to wear the hijab, and the ban on working have become sources of income for those in power, no matter how small. Many women have testified that they were only able to cross borders or travel by paying bribes or fines.

It becomes clear that the restrictions imposed on the population, particularly on women, are not only driven by the fundamentalist zeal of Taliban religious leaders who want to spread sharia but also by the economic opportunities these restrictions offer to officials who apply them, in the form of bribes and taxes for any essential service required for survival.

The absolute subjugation women are forced into, which makes them work in conditions akin to slavery and renders them the poorest stratum of society—humanitarian aid reaches women and children last or not at all—allows the Taliban to profit by exploiting their labor.

Where taxes are insufficient, corruption takes over. Witnesses have told 8AM Media that corruption has increased significantly compared to the first emirate. “Officials are involved in business ventures, buying land and houses, building oil reservoirs, and conducting trade. Additionally, there are cases of drug trafficking, and most local commanders, once in power, take a second, third, and fourth wife, organize lavish weddings, and buy expensive cars. The same officials admit that corruption, particularly rampant in customs, is uncontrollable because every commander or Taliban member has ties to the regime and is untouchable.”

In the Taliban power structure, where wives are seen as status symbols, leaders, officials, and fighters are fueling the practice of offering “bride prices” higher than the market rate, exploiting both the desire to curry favor with the Taliban through blood ties and the fear of reprisals in the event of refusal.

Government employment is also a means of rewarding fighters and loyalists while punishing dissenters. It has therefore been an immediate focus of Taliban attention to ensure control through various absurd decrees, such as replacing female public servants at the Ministry of Finance with male family members, regardless of their qualifications, or introducing a religious test, arbitrarily used to fire workers in public hospitals and at all levels of the Ministry of Education.

Unsurprisingly, power positions have been entrusted to relatives: the accusations against Taliban leaders for appointing their sons and other male relatives to government positions have become so serious that Supreme Leader Akhundzada issued a decree in March 2023 ordering officials to stop.

But while the privileges granted to low-ranking officials serve to ensure their unwavering loyalty, the more powerful leaders have more significant sources of income and, above all, are organizing to safeguard their wealth abroad, following well-established paths from the previous government—namely, through travel.

“Health reasons” is the excuse used to circumvent international sanctions that prohibit Taliban government officials—all of whom have been accused of international terrorism for many years—from traveling. In reality, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, and Turkey have always been willing to offer individual Taliban leaders a safe haven for their assets or families, allowing them to move personal financial resources abroad.

Though the government publishes budgets, it is reluctant to explain how economic resources are used. There is no public accounting or criteria for awarding government contracts, property sales, licenses, or other concessions, nor are there external accountability mechanisms. According to the president of Afghan Peace Watch, close relatives of at least two current interim Taliban ministers have private offices through which Afghan and foreign contractors can obtain government contracts and other favors for an additional fee.

Rather than concern themselves with international recognition, the Taliban seem more interested in increasing their access to cash, and customs revenues are a significant source of foreign currency, given that the international community has cut off access to foreign reserves.

Exports and customs duties related to natural resources have significantly increased their income. Taliban leaders exert virtually unchecked control over the rights, extraction, and export of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth. Especially coal—relying on child labor—but a United Nations report has indicated they also smuggle precious stones and semi-precious metals to Central Asia, Europe, and the Persian Gulf. Similarly, illegal logging and timber exports have become very profitable.

Smuggling is also a source of wealth. A major route for illicit trade, drug trafficking, and other corrupt practices is the Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement (APTTA), which sees a vast quantity of products diverted to Pakistan’s black market, circumventing tariffs and duties, estimated at billions of dollars, without any checks being imposed: officials and border agents are either bribed or coerced into not intervening.

The Taliban have also been identified as directly involved in arms trafficking. With their permission, arms dealers have set up bazaars in the Helmand, Kandahar, and Nangarhar regions, with weapons imported from Austria, China, Pakistan, Russia, and Turkey.

Human trafficking by smuggling networks is another source of income: while senior Taliban leaders have publicly declared a ban on it, individual guards do not hesitate to accept bribes in exchange for turning a blind eye at border crossings, according to reports.

Then there is the opium trade, which has always been the main source of wealth for the Taliban. The government has banned its cultivation, causing heroin prices to rise significantly, benefiting the wealthier individuals who can profit from the stockpiled opium. The Taliban leaders banned opium cultivation because they want to impose their authority, deciding where and whether it can be cultivated and who the authorized traffickers are to manage, cultivate, and process narcotics.

Finally, there are humanitarian organizations operating in Afghanistan: they are often forced to pay taxes, presumably to ensure their security. The Taliban even demand 15% of U.N. aid. But that’s not all: they have infiltrated many organizations with their affiliates, occupying strategic positions to manipulate aid and direct funds toward their supporters, family members, disabled soldiers, veterans, and madrasas, sometimes with the mediation of mullahs who serve as community leaders in exchange for a bribe. And those who manage to receive aid are taxed up to 66% of what they get.

They have also established and registered their own NGOs, which they control directly, and through which they can receive humanitarian aid from international organizations and distribute it in areas with greater political, ethnic, regional, and religious affinities.

But how much money have they managed to obtain this way? If we look, for example, at aid sent by the United States, which is by far the largest donor, SIGAR reveals that since August 2021, U.S. implementing partners have paid at least $10.9 million to the Taliban government in taxes, fees, and services. However, SIGAR believes that, since payments made by UN agencies receiving U.S. funds are not subject to scrutiny, the actual amount could be much higher, considering that from October 2021 to September 2023, the United Nations received $1.6 billion from the United States, out of a total of $2.9 billion in U.S. aid over the three-year period. All this money helps keep the Taliban in power because it pays the privileges and corruption of their loyal corrupt officials and supporters, ensuring their backing.

What would happen if this aid stopped flowing?

A significant part of the documentation supporting this article comes from the George W. Bush Presidential Center report ‘Corruption and Kleptocracy in Afghanistan under the Taliban.’

Beatrice Biliato is part of the Italian Coordination in Support of Afghan Women (CISDA)