Membre Fondateur de l'OSMTH
Organisation Non Gouvernementale à statut consultatif spécial aux Nations Unies
Membre du D.P.I et du CoNGO (Conférence des ONG à statut consultatif)
Membre du Bureau International de la Paix ( Prix Nobel 1910)
RECAPITULATIF DE NOS DECLARATIONS A L' ONU
13/10/2007 Message de l’Ordre à l’Union Européenne à l’occasion du 50ème anniversaire de l’U.E.(Union Européenne) 20150420 ethiopia (50.4 Ko)
13/10/2007 Déclaration de Bruxelles (OSMTH:Notre Vision - Notre Engagement - Nos Actions)Declaration de bruxelles (32.5 Ko)
12/04/2008 Déclaration de Windsor (OSMTH:Relations inter-cultuelles)Osmth windsor statement (32.25 Ko)
05/09/2008 Lettre Ouverte au Secrétaire Général de l’ONU (Responsabilité des Personnels ONU vis à vis du T.P.I. en cas d’abus sexuels ou d’exploitation au cours des missions de Maintien de la Paix) ( lettre rédigée par le Mouvement Mondial des Mères et l’OSMTH)2008 sept open letter to un sg un dpi (29 Ko)
27/02/2009 Déclaration Ecrite conjointe des ONG sur l’Education aux Droits de l’Homme ref (112): A/HRC/10/NGO/112 co-signée par l’OSMTH et présentée lors de la 10ème session du Conseil des Droits de l’Homme (Genève, 2-13 mars 2009) (Education aux Droits de l’Homme)2009 fev human rights educationjoint statement 27 02 2009 (145.53 Ko)
13/03/2009 PANEL SUR L'EDUCATION AUX DROITS DE L'HOMME, session spéciale lors de la 10ème session du Conseil des Droits de l'Homme de l'ONU à Genève Flyer 2009 march hre series panel iv draft (42 Ko)
04/09/2009 EDUCATION AUX DROITS DE L'HOMME EN DETENTION, session spéciale lors de la session du Conseil des Droits de l'Homme de l'ONU à Genève (voire le texte en bas de page)13 sept 2011 flyer (81 Ko)
18/09/2009 et 30/09/2009 Nos 2 Déclarations Orales conjointes des ONG (12ème session du Conseil des Droits de l’Homme a Geneve) : ( 1) Draft UN Declaration on Human Rights Education (Voire la vidéo) item 2 (15H/18H) (2) Implementation du Programme Mondial d’Education aux Droits de l’Homme
04/03/2010 Nos 2 Déclarations Ecrites conjointes (13ème session du Conseil des Droits de l’Homme à Genève) The World Program for Human Rights Education : From the First to the Second phase" et "The first draft of the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training". 2010 fev a hrc 13 ngo 93 26 02 2010 (125.29 Ko)2010 fev a hrc 13 ngo 94 26 fev 2010 agenda item 5 (108.98 Ko)
03/06/2010 Notre Déclaration Orale conjointe (14ème session du Conseil des Droits de l’Homme à Genève) :"Protection and Promotion of all Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Right, including the Right to Development."2010 juin csvgc oral statement 14hrc (46 Ko)
17/01/2011 au 21/01/2011 Déclaration écrite conjointe des ONG (6ème session du Comité Consultatif du Conseil des Droits de l’Homme) N° 1/HRC/AC/6/NGO/1 :"Managing Resources to give Peace and Humankind a Chance" ("Gerer les Ressources pour donner un chance à la Paix et à
28/02/2011 Déclaration Ecrite conjointe de 38 ONG (16ème session du Conseil des Droits de l’Homme à Genève) N° A/HRC/16/NGO/116: (page 2 du site ONU, référence N°116) "NGO assessment of the Draft United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training" ("La Position des ONG concernant le projet de Déclaration sur l’éducation et l’entrainement aux Droits de l’Homme")2011 written statement 2011 ecosoc environmental education (92.73 Ko)
02/03/2011 : Déclaration Orale conjointe de 9 ONG aux Nations Unies à New York (Comité sur le Statut de la Femme-Panel d’experts N°5- 15H00) :"Empowerment of Women and Gender Equality". ("Autonomisation des Femmes et Egalité des Genres") 2011 mars french oral statement droit des demmescsw55 v (1.1 Mo)
05/2011 Déclaration Ecrite conjointe de 20 ONG sur l’Education à l’Environnement (ECOSOC) "Implementing the Internationally Agreed Goals and Commitments in regard to Environmental Education"(Mise en application des objectifs internationalement acceptés en ce qui concerne l’Education à l’Environnement")2011 a hrc 16 ngo 116 2011march (42.34 Ko)
12/09/2011 PANEL SESSION SPECIALE "au cours de la 18éme session du Conseil des Droits de l'Homme, ONU, Genève)13 sept 2011 flyer (81 Ko)
16/09/2012 Déclaration Ecrite "accès à l'eau potable, à la cuisson des aliments, déforestation et Droits de l'Homme" (XXIeme session du conseil des Droits de l'Homme, Genève)2012 written statement xxi session clean water access (391.2 Ko)
09/2014 Déclaration Orale conjointe, éducation aux droits de l'Homme (27ème session du Conseil des Droits de l'Homme, ONU, Genève)2014 hrc27 text ngojointoralstatement item 3 wphre p3 un declaration (22.74 Ko)
17/01/2015 Déclaration écrite sur le statut de la Femme au Comité du Statut de la Femme, ONU - NEW YORK2015 written statement csw 2015 (260.19 Ko)
26/02/2015 PANEL SESSION SPECIALE "INTERFAITH PERSPECTIVES: upholding a Universal Agenda for Human Dignity and sustainable Development , Réunion de la conférence des ONG à NEW YORKCsvgc nygenmtg flier2 02 26 15 (223.99 Ko)
08/03/2015 Déclaration Orale conjointe, éducation aux droits de l'Homme (28ème session du Conseil des Droits de l'Homme, ONU, Genève)2015 hrc28 ngojointoralstatement item 3 wphre p2 p3 text (23.32 Ko)
20/04/2015 Déclaration sur les massacres en Ethiopie 20150420 ethiopia (50.4 Ko)
22/05/2016 Déclaration écrite sur la destruction des sites sacrés et le terrorisme , lors de la 32ème session du Conseil des Droits de l'Homme, Genève)2016 jun 1785 a hrc 32 sacred sites june 2016 (55.73 Ko)
22/09/2016 déclaration Orale lors de la 61éme session du comité du Statut de la Femme , ONU NEW YORKOsmth statement re 61st session of the commission on the status of women 2016 (42.25 Ko)
09/2017 Déclaration Ecrite "establishing a trusted roadmap to peace in Jerusalem (XXXVIeme session du Conseil des Droits de l'Homme, Genève)Written statement hrc 36 sept 2017 (48.24 Ko)
24/03/2009 ORGANISATION DE CONFERENCE AU PALAIS DES NATIONS - ONU GENEVE
Report Panel on Intercultural and Interfaith Educ Xème session du Conseil des Droits de l'Homme, O.N.U.Genève, 02 - 24 Mars 2009ation: An Imperative for AchievingFreedom of Religion and Mutual Understanding Held during the Xth session of the council on Human Rights United Nations Palace, room: XXII
Organisée par l'OSMTH et ARIGATOU INTERNATIONAL
- Dr. Marcel de Picciotto (OSMTH: Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem)
- Ms. María Lucía Uribe (Arigatou Foundation)
- Ms. Dakmara Georgescu, Programme Coordinator, Technical assistance to UNESCO member States, UNESCO International Bureau of Education
- Dr. John Taylor, Representative, International Association for Religious Freedom and Co-chair, NGO Committee on Freedom of Religion and Belief
- Dr. Charles Graves, Representative Interfaith International
- Ms. Agneta Ucko, Director Arigatou Foundation in Geneva
- Ms. Ariane Hentsch, Representative Coexist – Youth Interfaith Platform, Geneva
The panel aimed to look at the main issues concerning discrimination on the basis of religion or beliefs, with special emphasis on what has been done in the field of interfaith and intercultural dialogue and education, current perspectives, challenges and progress.
Ms. Dakmara Georgescu highlighted today’s curriculum trends in formal and non-formal education promoting learning to live together through intercultural education as well as the challenges for its implementation. While foci and approaches may differ, learning to live together and intercultural education are in most cases national priorities within education and curriculum reforms. They are taught in a variety of ways: promoting the appreciation of one’s own culture, of other cultures, fostering respect and tolerance for diversity, and most complexly learning from one another in order to engage in a constructive dialogue.There is an understanding of values as the core of the definition of culture, which include other concepts like social habits, norms and rules, symbols, language, knowledge, identity, identities,artistic manifestations, mindsets and beliefs,. She referred to the “onion” model of culture (Hofstede) to explain its different layers and pointed out the difficulties dealing with the inner part, which represents the values. Ms Georgescu underlined the following trends in the development of curriculum to foster intercultural education: 1) the multilayer approach of identity, not only promoting a local ornational identity but emphasizing that individual and community identities are forged in a more complex way nowadays.
2) The multi-linguistic approach which enhances learning about others.It includes teaching foreign languages but also minority languages in schools. 3) Intercultural studies are embedded in history, language courses or life skills courses. 4) Focus on competencies for life and work.Conceptualization of intercultural education is one of the main challenges for its implementation. Another major challenge is its application in post-conflict countries, quite often not yet preparedto deal with the “other” and at an early stage to initiate a process of healing and reconciliation.Quality education is also a concern in the application of intercultural education and the need for substantive capacity development and adequate know-how for teachers, decision makers and other stakeholders. The last challenge pointed out was the lack of knowledge on how to assess competences for life or the outcomes of peace and intercultural education. Ms. Georgescu finally underlined four learning outcomes of intercultural education: open mindedness, intercultural literacy, operational capacity to work together in complex and diverse environments, and linguistic proficiency in order to be better equipped to understand other cultures.
Dr. John Taylor made a connection between intercultural and interfaith education and the work of the UN special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion and Belief, Ms. Asma Jahangir. Ms. Jahangir gives high importance to education for understanding and recommends in her report the use of the Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions and Beliefs in Public Schools as a potential worldwide guideline. The final recommendations of the International Consultative Conference on School Education in relation to Freedom of Religion and Belief, Tolerance and Non-discrimination, organized by the former Special Rapporteur together with the Spanish government in Madrid, 2001, underlines the importance of school education to challenge religious discrimination between and within religious communities, and between religious and secular communities.
The UN General Assembly in November 2008 asked for the United Nations Decade for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue, Understanding, and Cooperation for Peace and proposed UNESCO and other UN agencies to investigate its feasibility. Dr. Graves pointed out that religion is on the agenda of the UN with positive responses from civil society, religious communities and a good number of UN agencies and governments. Finally Dr. Taylor said that 2010 will be a Year of Rapprochement among Cultures, with the support and implementation of UNESCO, for cooperative programs on the topic of intercultural and interfaith education.
Dr. Charles Graves spoke about his organization as a concrete example to promote interfaith cooperation in the area of human rights and shared specific cases of violation of freedom of religion and belief. Interfaith International provides an opportunity for people to meet despite their differences in a practical interfaith and intercultural experience within the context of human rights.
Some NGOs have difficulties participating in human rights debates due to restrictions impose by their governments. Interfaith International provides these NGOs with accreditation and the opportunity to speak at side events of the Human Rights Council. Dr. Graves also spoke about issues of religious discrimination and intolerance within religious communities and the efforts of Interfaith International to promote dialogue between minority and majority groups in certain countries. Dr. Graves noted that discussions about defamation of religion and freedom of religion can be held between States, if those discussions are carefully organized so the parties do not feel committed to any particular position about religions. Interfaith International also supports initiatives against xenophobia such as the Durban Review Conference to be held in April 2009 and the Civil Society Forum in that conference. Minority groups or those who are discriminated against should be given the opportunity to speak during the Conference.
Ms. Agneta Ucko introduced the Arigatou Foundation, a Buddhist, Japanese initiative and its Global Network of Religions for Children, GNRC, the only worldwide interreligious network dedicated to work for children. Ms. Ucko presented a publication recently developed by the Arigatou Foundation together with UNESCO and UNICEF, titled “Learning to Live Together” named after one of the UNESCO four pillars for education. One of the objectives of the material is to look at what is taught in the different faith traditions about the other in order to be peace builders and prevent conflicts. She said “If major religious traditions come out and speak together on human rights and children’s rights there is a greater chance to make a difference”. The material is developed to help youth leaders, teachers and facilitators who want to promote interfaith and intercultural understanding. The unique characteristic of this manual is that it was conceptualized from the beginning by scholars and practitioners from several religious traditions and secular thinking. The interreligious and interfaith process to develop the manual is an example of what it promotes.Another characteristic is that it was field tested in 15 different religious and cultural settings to understand how the values lifted up are conducive for harmonious living together. The material is available in three languages and it is a contribution to human rights and peace education. Its methodologies follow the concept of role modelling, placing great importance on those who use it. Ms. Ucko finally noted that this initiative doesn’t avoid putting on the table and work with the religious identity, which is sometimes more difficult to deal with.
The last speaker, Ms. Ariane Hentsch based her presentation on a survey about spirituality of young people presented in 2002 in the book Chemins de spiritualité. Jeunes en quête de sens,written by Gabriel Ringlet, as well on her experience within a local youth interfaith platform sheco-founded and with an international youth forum she organised for the World Council of Churches. The survey was developed for more than 500 university students aged 18 to 30, mainly from Europe. Its objective was to understand how young adults manage their quest for meaning and their relationship to organized religion. The survey shows that students in their great majority express a genuine yearning for spirituality, to be understood not in a strictly religious perspective but as a permanent quest for meaning. Youth consider organized religions as one source of meaning among others and their own community. For many students, their beliefs and observances are not officially embedded in organized religion but rather their quest is personal and pro-active. In 2004, the Youth Interfaith Platform, a local organization now renamed Coexist – was consulted about religious pluralism and its relation to interfaith and personal behaviour. The results show that pluralism should enable the adherents of different faiths to go beyond tolerance for each other and establish a respectful relationship. Pluralism should lead to a clear distinction between religion and politics, religious and institutional matters, and religious and cultural features.She spoke about the importance of a religious education that integrates religious pluralism. Youth seek guidance through the plethora of religious traditions, and not through a unilateral imposition of one dogma, they feel in charge of defining their religious and secular identity in conjunction with others and are critical of religious teachings, intellectually, emotionally, andspiritually.
The presentations were followed by questions and comments from the participants. Some of the questions were:
1. How can religious education be included in human rights education?
2.What concrete actions have been taken in relation to article 18 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights to promote human rights education?
3. What kind of religious education is needed to foster freedom of religion and belief, is it only religious education, interreligious or interfaith education?
In relation to the first and second questions, Ms. Georgescu responded that there are many initiatives already developed in Europe and in other countries to help ministries design courses on interreligious education. Ms. Georgescu also mentioned a study under the auspices of the Open Society Institute in 2004 on religious education in Europe that shows that in many European countries religion is taught comparatively as multi religion, or as history of religion, and not necessarily as instructing about a certain belief. However, there are cases in some countries where religious instruction about a particular faith still prevails.Ms. Georgescu underlined that the World Programme for Human Rights Education needs to provide more tools and promote effective experiences and good practices for people and organizations. It is also important to respect the policies of each country in relation to the inclusion of religious education in schools. Ms. Ucko pointed out that there are already many educational materials on interfaith education that foster respect for human rights. She also emphasised on the challenges ahead to promote interfaith education in countries where religious education is taught separately according to children’s religions.
In response to the third question, Dr. Taylor explained that religious education is categorised in three areas: learning religion, learning about religion and learning from religion Learning religion refers to instructing about a particular religion, learning about religions refers to teaching from a descriptive and historical approach, comparing values, beliefs and practices, and learning from religions emphasises on creating reflective spaces regarding questions to major religious and current issues.
Respect for freedom of religion and belief is still a complex issue in many countries today. The discussion underlined that religion, in some places, is exploited for political ends, fuelling discrimination based on religion or belief, and therefore restricting or denying the access to health services, public education of public posts to certain minority religious groups. Intercultural and interfaith education and dialogue is a response to promote freedom of religion and belief and an effort to bring about mutual understanding and respect to societies. It is an area still to be refined and further conceptualised in order to be easily measured and evaluated. Intercultural and interfaith education and dialogue is already in the agenda of the United Nations, its agencies and many NGOs and governments. It has become a priority in our current interdependent and globalised world and a need to be able to live and work together. It is the right time to mainstream interfaith an d intercultural education into the human rights arena andpromote it in those countries where religious and cultural discrimination is still a reality, in other places where it can serve as a preventive measure and in post conflict regions where reconciliation and respect for the other are needed.
LE DROIT A L'EDUCATION DANS LES LIEUX DE DETENTION
Session parallèle avec Mr Vernor MUNOZ, Rapporteur Spécial sur le Droit à l'Education, organisée au cours de la XIème Session du Conseil des Droits de l'Homme à l'ONU à Genève.
Genève, Palais des Nations, salle IX, 4 Juin 2009 13H - 15H
Organisé par : - Defense for Children International
- Quaker UN Office
- Le Groupe de travail des ONG sur l'Education et l'Apprentissage des Droits de l'Homme
- Bureau International Catholique de l'Enfance
Mr Verner MUNOZ, Rapporteur Spécial des Nations Unies sur le Droit à l'Education
Dr Marcel de PICCIOTTO, (OSMTH), Groupe de travail des ONG sur l'Education et l'Apprentissage des Droits de l'Homme
Ms Gabrielle CHAIZY, Juvenile Justice Programme Officer, Defence for Children International
Ms Rachel BRETT, Déléguée ( Droits de l'Homme et Réfugiés) , UN Quaker Office
THE RIGHT TO EDUCATION IN DETENTION: A LIGHT TOWARDS A BRIGHTER FUTURE FOR THE DETAINEE.
By Dr Marcel de PICCIOTTO,
OSMTH (Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem),
From the NGO Working Group on Human Rights Education
Geneva, XIth session of the Council on Human Rights June 4, 2009
Multiple Issues restrain the proper implementation of the Right to Education in Detention.
They are either related to the person deprived of his/her liberty, or related to the system ( not the last of them being the lack of Education on Human Rights during the training process of the personnel); this presentation highlights some of these major issuesconcerning the detainee and/or the system and proposes some ideas for the improvement of the current condition on the subject.
While the right for persons deprived of their liberty to have the same education, (as well as the same health coverage), than those not in detention, is a fundamental Human Right, (as reaffirmed in numerous documents since the Human Rights Declaration in 1948, like the 1955 declaration, the 1966 International Civil and Political Rights Pact , the Kampala Declaration…), we must recognise that this is still, regretfully, not the case.
For the sake of time, I will focus on detainees detained in prisons, (as I many countries, those detained under immigration laws are put in prison). Many of the issues I will address apply also to those seeking asylum, and detained under immigration laws.
The issues are multiple. Amongst those, Some relate to the detainee himself or herself , such as:
- The problem of the legal age of children to be detained
- The lack of previous education, or a previous failure experiences
- The inability to speak the language of the country of detention
- The lack of vision for his/her future and/or of perseverance
- Drug or alcohol abuse
- Important health issues and concerns conflicting with the ability to be fully “available” for an education program (dialysis, heart, respiratory problems, cancer, HIV...)
- The isolation from one’s country or family ( case of those seeking asylum for instance)
- Refusals of sessions due to contrarieties such as a bad confrontation with a judge, with a guardian, the non-receipt of a letter from a relative, a problem with a co-detained person, etc…( this refusal is also often seen in cases of medical treatments “I refuse to take my medicine or to go to the doctor- because this and this” is a phrase often heard.
- Ignorance or misunderstanding of the goals/purpose/ agenda/benefits of the Education program,
-A special mention can also be made for the case of refugees in camps. Should the situation be assessed as possibly not a short displacement, maintenance of education should by all means be part of the requisites, as a guarantee both of local peace and of possible solutions for the next generation.
To help realise this goal, which might not be seen as deserving a top priority, one should take advantage of the qualifications of some of the refugees themselves: should there be scholars, teachers, doctors, etc amongst them, these should be identified and means should be allowed for them to continue their mission, in cooperation with the NGOs and the supporting country (ies)
Some relate to the system:
- Schedule difficulties , to insert in the detention process ( movements, meal time, family visits, judge, advocate, …)
- Lack of adequate sufficient state funding
- Lack of trained accredited personnel
- Lack of education to Human Rights during the training cursus of the personnel, although it has been reaffirmed in many international official documents such as the World Program for Human Rights Education (2005-), or the UN Decade for Human rights Education (1995-2004), as previously stated, this can be due to- ignorance or misunderstanding of the goals/purpose/ agenda/benefits of Education to Human Rights and/or to the ways to implement them..
- Issues seen as “more urgent” by the different authorities or public opinion: it is in fact not easy for the non detained persons to understand the needs of the detainees, if they are themselves in need, or cannot themselves have a correct access to education.…Or have no knowledge whatsoever of what are the Human Rights.
- Cultural aspects and/or traditions (Role of women, etc..)
- Multiple transfers from one prison to another one, with generally no prior notice, do reflect very negatively on the possibilities of a personalised and sustained education program.
- Lack of information on the programs available, and too often, no real continuity after liberation.
- Security imperatives in some cases restrain completely access to internet, as well as the fear to grant contact with non penitentiary personnel. This limits access specifically to higher levels of education, those where experience, interface with academics, and research are customary in the out of the prison walls world.
- Detention periods are often with intervals of liberty, and/or length of detention varies greatly from one detainee to the other, and even for the same detainee, the real detention time is often not known with certainty at the early stages of detention. This renders the establishment of programs even more difficult.
- Old detention facilities (sometimes dating from the first half of the XXth century) , lacking the equipment and/or the personnel and/or the place to organise specific educational activities…
And I could continue on for the rest of this presentation
I wish to share with you some ideas for the improvement of the current condition on this subject
1. Develop a nationwide INTRANET education program which could be followed by the detainee, even when he/she changes prison/residence: INTRANET allows controlled access and would be fully securable:
A nationwide INTRANET Education system would also ease most of the schedule issues due to detention specifics and adapt the process to the capacities, to the level and to the learning progress of the individual detainee, provided a minimal initial period of training on how to use the tool is provided; It might allow some academics interfaces.
For those with almost no knowledge of the language of the country,( often illegal immigrants and/or asylum seekers), (or those illiterate) either a language interface or a pictogram based program could be developed.
Cultural or other specifics if relevant (age, religion, …) could also be used, not as deterrents, but as adherence tools to the program
2. Education on Human rights should be made mandatory during all trainings of detention personnel whether they be civilian or military, public or private employees ( at all levels of the process: police forces, civil workers, immigration officers, advocates, prosecutors, judges): all hose I would call “law enforcers”.
3. Education goals and post detention employment perspectives should be defined jointly by the detainee and the local coordinator of the education program at the start of the program, and should be eventually revised according to the progresses.
4. Preventive detention (if it applies) should in all cases be used at least as an evaluation period for the education process, and education should start as soon as possible The Education process should be adapted to the level of the personal detainee, and follow up should be provided after the detention period. It is best if the detainee can keep the same coordinator throughout the length of the program (here again, intranet could help). The particular education needs of the detained person (male/female) should be discussed and ascertained individually- and not only gender or age oriented. Education to Language and reading should be implemented whenever these skills are not mastered, and this in the earliest stages of detention: This is often upmost important as soon as during the pre-trial and/or the trial period.
5. Participation of recognised academic authorities and delivering of recognised diplomas, need to be developed Partial Certificates of completion could be developed, as “intermediate rewards”, enhancing self esteem. These certificates, signed by an official academic authority of the State, could be handed out during some kind of special event, with the family of the detainee represented (if possible). It is important that the family understands and fully supports the education program Levels of diplomas, up to doctorate’s level should be possible to obtain. Other possible rewards could be a partial remittal of sentence (one month, one year, or if not possible, some other “advantage”…), for each certificate obtained.
6. Enhance the cooperation of NGOs and all other interested civil actors in these fields, for a win/win partnership: the detainee gains better access to education, and the state benefits from the dedicated trained (and accredited) personnel of the NGOs. NGOs might also prove useful in the post detention period. NGOs could also- if requested -participate in the training of the personnel in terms of Education to Human Rights., at levels to be defined jointly with the states. Being “Non Governmental” does not mean being in essence “Anti Governmental”. It is now time, more than ever, for a truthful partnership in these issues between civil actors, specially NGOs, and Governments ready to take the challenge.
I thank you for you attention.