For the Daily Edition of The Humanion
Coverage
Visit The
Arkives
|
Collapsing
Consumer Demand Amid
Lockdowns Cripple
Asia-Pacific Garment
Industry: It Is Time the
World Supports the Countries
Where There Is No Social
Security to Create and
Extend Social Security to
All Those Who Need It: This
Is What Must the World’s New
Progressive Political Forces
Fight For Now: Humanity Can
Not Be Left Out to Hunger
Misery and Destitution
|
 |
||
Thursday: October 22: 2020 || ά. The COVID-19 pandemic has
triggered government lockdowns, collapsed consumer demand and
disrupted imports of raw materials, battering the Asia Pacific
garment industry especially hard, according to a new Report,
released on Wednesday by the International Labour Organisation:ILO.
ILO Report highlighted that in the first half of 2020, Asian imports
had dropped by up to 70%. And how we would like the reader to
contemplate what is happening to the workers, who have lost their
jobs and livelihoods? How are they feeding themselves and their
families? How are they paying for their necessities when they
neither have any savings nor any income coming from anywhere? How
long can they survive in this state? In hunger, malnutrition and
perpetual misery and hardship? How long can they go on being
destitute? Till they fall apart and end their life? This can not go
on and it must not be accepted. It is time the world and the entire
mechanism of the world must come up with real, measurable, credible,
immediate and urgent means and mechanism to support the world’s
countries, where there is no social security, to create and extend
social security to those, who need it. This can not go on for the
pandemic has brought untold and all-ignored destitution over
hundreds of millions of humanity across the world. It is time new
progressive political forces begin to work and demand that this
becomes the absolute-must task before all humanity: to end hunger,
malnutrition and destitution, that are now being enforeced on such a
large number of humanity across the world! It can not keep on going:
it must come to an end. NOW.
Moreover, as of September, almost,
half of all garment supply chain
jobs, were dependent on consumers,
living in countries where lockdown
conditions were being most tightly
imposed, leading to plummeting
retail sales. ILO Regional Director
for Asia and the Pacific, Ms Chihoko
Asada Miyakawa, pointed out that the
research highlights the massive
impact COVID-19 has had on the
garment industry at every level. In
2019, the Asia-Pacific region had
employed an estimated 65 million in
the sector, accounting for 75% of
all garment workers worldwide, the
Report shows. Although, governments
in the region have responded
proactively to the crisis, thousands
of factories have been shuttered,
either temporarily or indefinitely,
prompting a sharp increase in worker
lay-offs and dismissals. And the
factories, that have reopened, are,
often, operating at reduced
workforce capacity.
“The typical garment worker in the
region lost out on, at least, two to
four weeks of work and saw only
three in five of her co-workers
called back to the factory when it
reopened.” said Mr Christian
Viegelahn, Labour Economist at the
ILO Regional Office for Asia and the
Pacific. “Declines in earnings and
delays in wage payments were, also,
common among garment workers still
employed in the second quarter of
2020”.
As
women comprise the vast majority of
the region’s garment workers, they
are being disproportionately
affected by the crisis, the Report
tracked. Additionally, their
situation is exacerbated by existing
inequalities, including, increased
workloads and gender
over-representation, as well as, a
rise in unpaid care work and
subsequent loss of earnings
To
mitigate the situation, the brief
calls for inclusive social dialogue
at national and workplace levels, in
countries across the region. The
Report, also, recommends continued
support for enterprises, along with
extending social protection for
workers, especially, for women.
The ILO’s recent global Call to
Action to support manufacturers and
help them survive the pandemic’s
economic disruption and protect
garment workers’ income, health and
employment’ was cited as ‘a
promising example of industry-wide
solidarity in addressing the
crisis’. “It is vital that
governments, workers, employers and
other industry stakeholders work
together to navigate these
unprecedented conditions and help
forge a more human-centred future
for the industry.” said Ms Miyakawa.
The Study assessed the pandemic’s
impact on supply chains, factories
and workers in Baangladesh,
Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia,
Myanmar, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri
Lanka and Viet Nam. It is based on
research and analysis of publicly
available data together with
interviews from across the sector in
Asia.
||
Free Annual Subscription to The Humanion Portable Daily For
Students: Workers: Unwaged: Journalism and Media Workers ||
||
Readmore
||
reginehumanicsfoundation.com
|| :::ω:::
||
231020
|| Up ||
|
Protecting
Economic and Social Rights
During and Post-Covid-19:
These Are the Most Vital
Issues World’s Working and
Non-Working Humanity Are
Faced With But the World’s
So-Called Progressive Forces
Are Not Raising Them |
 |
||
Tuesday: July 01: 2020 || ά.
This has been presented by Human Rights Watch and we thank
the Organisation for doing so because the so-called
progressive forces of the world have taken leave of the
political fields. They should be fighting to bring these
issues out and raise them to highest on the political
agenda. But they are not doing so. They are waiting for the
next election to try their luck. No wonder they are falling
away from the support of the people because they have become
part of the complicity mechanism of capitalism. But people,
the working and non-working humanity of this earth are
suffering unprecedented hardships. The Covid-19 pandemic is
likely to have long-lasting consequences on economic and
social rights, stemming from the direct and indirect effects
of the illness, people’s co-operation with prevention
efforts and government transmission control policies.
Economic projections have already
been revised downward for most
regions and countries, driven by
shocks to both demand and supply and
sharp declines in the circulation of
goods, services, people and capital.
The economic fallout is estimated to
increase the poverty headcount at
$05.50 per day by as many as a
half-billion people, eight percent
of the world’s population. This
would reverse a decade of global
progress in reducing poverty and in
some regions the adverse impacts
could result in poverty levels,
similar to those 30 years ago. The
pandemic has starkly exposed
economic inequalities, especially,
in countries with fragile social
protection systems, where vulnerable
groups bear the brunt of the crisis.
The pandemic has, also, highlighted
stark inequalities in wealthier
countries with previously
better-funded social protection.
People living in poverty are more
likely to have health complications,
live in crowded or poor-quality
housing and lack the resources to
stay at home for long periods or
follow hygiene recommendations.
And low-paid jobs force them to
choose between risking their health
or losing their income. To remain
afloat, people need large, timely
and targeted fiscal support, that
addresses the multiple axes of
inequality and discrimination. Human
Rights Watch is, particularly,
concerned about the pandemic’s
impact on the economic and social
rights of those, already, in
precarious economic situations, who
are, often, more exposed to
financial shocks because of
socio-economic inequalities and
discrimination.
This question-and-answer document
examines how to ensure that the
right to an adequate standard of
living, among other human rights
standards, is at the centre of the
economic response to Covid-19. It
summarises several types of
government responses and provides
recommendations for governments and
financial institutions for immediate
to short-term, medium-term and
longer-term measures to help
mitigate human rights risks, posed
by the pandemic and containment
measures.
::: Human Rights Standards: What Is
the Human Right to an Adequate
Standard of Living :::
::: Under international human rights
law, governments have an obligation
to ensure people’s right to an
adequate standard of living, so that
everyone enjoys the rights,
necessary to live in dignity,
including, the rights to adequate
food and nutrition, health and
well-being, water and sanitation and
housing. Countries need to ensure
equal access to these rights for
all, without discrimination on
grounds, such as , gender, race or
ethnicity, age or disability.
The right is set out in the
Universal Declaration of Human
Rights: UDHR: Article 25:1:
‘’Everyone has the right to a
standard of living adequate for the
health and well-being of himself and
of his family, including food,
clothing, housing and medical care
and necessary social services, and
the right to security in the event
of unemployment, sickness,
disability, widowhood, old age or
other lack of livelihood in
circumstances beyond his control.’’
It
is further developed in Article 11
of the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights:ICESCR. The United Nations
Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights has issued several
General Comments, explaining the
components of this right, including,
the right to adequate housing,
General Comments Four and Seven,
food, General Comment 12, water,
General Comment 15, as well as,
social security, General Comment 19.
Through these General Comments, the
Committee elaborates on criteria to
fulfil these rights and provides the
most comprehensive interpretation of
these rights under international
law. The right to health has been
included in a number of human rights
treaties; the main ones are Article
25 UDHR and Article 12 ICECSR.
::: Are Governments Obligated to
Provide Social Protection or Social
Security :::
::: Yes. Under human rights law, the
government is legally obligated to
establish social protection systems.
The terms social security and social
protection are used interchangeably
to refer to in-cash or in-kind
benefits to provide protection in
case of social risks and needs. This
duty to provide social protection
flows directly from the right to
social security, which is
articulated in Article 25 of the
UDHR and in Article Nine of the
ICESCR. In General Comment No. 19 on
the right to social security, the
ICESCR spells out the key features
of this right and the content of
countries’ obligations. The
committee says that the right to
social security implies two
predominant categories of measures:
social insurance schemes, for which
beneficiaries have contributed
financially; and social assistance
schemes, non-contributory and
typically taxation-funded measures
to transfer resources to groups
deemed eligible due to vulnerability
or deprivation.
Social protection measures secure
protection against lack of
work-related income or insufficient
income, caused by sickness,
disability, maternity, employment
injury, unemployment, old age, death
of a family member or general
poverty and social exclusion, among
other things. Social protection
measures include cash transfer
schemes, unemployment or disability
benefits, social pensions, food
assistance, or subsidized services.
Governments must ensure that social
protection is equally available to
everyone, and must direct their
attention to ensuring universal
coverage; reasonable, proportionate
and transparent eligibility
criteria; affordability and physical
accessibility for beneficiaries;
access to information about the
provision of benefits; and
participation by potential
beneficiaries in the administration
of these services. Governments need
to ensure that there is no
discriminatory exclusion from social
security and other forms of social
protection.
::: What Are Countries’ ‘Minimum
Core Obligations :::
UN
treaty bodies have set out minimum
core obligations on countries,
meaning the basic rights they should
ensure at all times, for everyone.
Within the right to an adequate
standard of living, core obligations
include ensuring access to the
minimum essential nutritionally
adequate and safe food and freedom
from hunger; to basic shelter,
housing and sanitation; an adequate
supply of safe drinking water; and
social protection, that provides a
minimum essential level of benefits.
International law does not require
any particular method to ensure
everyone has a decent standard of
living. Governments may directly
provide essentials, such as, food
and water; ensure that essentials
are available and affordable; and
ensure that everyone has sufficient
income for adequate food, housing
and other essentials. This can,
also, be achieved through respecting
the related rights of everyone to
social security and to wages
sufficient to provide a decent
living for workers, a so-called
living wage.
Countries with limited resources
still have an obligation to ensure
an adequate standard of living.
Even, in times of crisis,
governments are required to make
every effort to meet these
obligations with existing resources,
including, international assistance
and allocate them in the way, that
maximises respect for human rights,
including, taking into account the
precarious situation of
disadvantaged and marginalised
individuals or groups.
::: What Does ‘Progressive
Realisation’ Mean in This Context
:::
In
addition to the minimum core
obligations on governments, Article
11:1 of the ICESCR says that they
are obliged to ensure for everyone
the ‘continuous improvement of
living conditions’. Article Two of
the ICESCR requires governments to
use the maximum available resources
to achieve progressively the “full
realisation’ of all the rights in
the covenant.
::: How Does Covid-19 Affect the
Right to an Adequate Standard of
Living :::
Covid-19 reinforced the relevance of
the right to an adequate standard of
living. The impact of the pandemic
has been felt, particularly, hard in
situations in which the right had
not previously been guaranteed.
People without adequate housing are
at higher risk of contracting highly
communicable diseases like Covid-19
due to their lack of capacity to
follow hygiene recommendations or
social distancing. People living on
the streets, in shelters or
overcrowded informal settlements
are, particularly, vulnerable to an
outbreak. Globally, before the
pandemic, over a billion people
lived in informal settlements and an
estimated 150 million people or
about 02% of the world’s population,
were homeless.
Similarly, the lack of safe drinking
water and sanitation at home, work
or in healthcare settings make
preventive measures difficult and
could harm fulfilment of the right
to an adequate living standard. In
some cases, inadequate water and
sanitation itself may be a locus for
the spread of the disease. About 780
million people around the world lack
access to an improved water source,
which, by nature of its
construction, adequately protects
the water from outside
contamination, and 02.5 billion lack
access to proper sanitation. In
metropolitan Harare, Zimbabwe’s
capital, half the population has
undependable access to safe drinking
water in their homes. And in
Venezuela, handwashing is difficult,
even, for healthcare providers, who,
often, lack soap and disinfectants.
::: Section 2: Government Relief in
the Immediate Medium and Long Term
:::
Human Rights Watch reviewed
government responses in about a
dozen countries, analysing aspects,
such as, income support, paid sick
leave, food assistance and other
measures. In many cases, governments
had taken some important steps but,
they have not been sufficient or
adequately targeted to support
workers, who lost jobs or income,
especially, in the informal economy.
Despite massive liquidity injections
from central banks and huge
financial support packages, many
low-income people remain unable to
afford necessities, such as, rent,
utilities and food.
::: What Are Some of the Concerns
With Government Responses :::
In
Lebanon, where the spread of
Covid-19 compounded the economic
crisis, that has been roiling the
country since 2019, the government
announced plans to provide food
assistance, that did not materialise
and financial aid, that was
significantly delayed and
insufficient to provide for
families’ basic needs. The economic
hardship has reignited widespread
protests.
In
Uganda, food assistance was planned
for 01.5 million people, though more
than ninr million Ugandans live in
poverty. Assistance has been
restricted to specific urban areas,
leaving the rest of the country
without support. Economic relief has
been similarly inadequate in
Nigeria, the biggest economy in
Africa, where only a small share of
those living in poverty have
received assistance. An emergency
stimulus bill, passed by Nigeria’s
House of Representatives but not yet
approved by the Senate, would
provide support only to employers in
the formal sector, though, more than
80 percent of the country’s workers
are in the informal sector.
In
Kenya, the government promised about
$02.8 million in emergency funds for
those in need. It is unclear, who
has received this support and what
criteria have been used to identify
those in need.
In
India, the government’s economic
package did not sufficiently address
the needs of migrant workers and
workers in the informal economy,
many of them women. In the US,
relief packages, such as, the CARES
Act and the Families First
Coronavirus Response Act are largely
temporary fixes and exclude informal
and undocumented taxpaying workers,
while billions of dollars were
provided to large companies without
sufficient public oversight or
restrictions.
::: How Can Social and Economic
Assistance in the Immediate to
Short-term Protect Livelihoods :::
There are several policy responses
governments could follow to,
immediately, assist all those, who
need support. Particularly, in
countries with low and middle
income, hard-hit sectors have a high
share of workers in informal
employment and with limited access
to health services and social
protection. Assistance can take the
form of expanding coverage and
benefits in existing social
protection programs and or
introducing new protection to those
not sufficiently covered by existing
programs, which should be developed
in consultation with a wide range of
civil society groups. This could
include easing eligibility
requirements and expanding
unemployment insurance and other
social protection programmes,
employment subsidies, temporary tax
breaks and deferrals for low-income
households and credit guarantees.
Social and economic assistance
should be directed toward those at
greatest economic risk due to
Covid-19. This support should
include informal and undocumented
workers, including, domestic
workers, migrant farmworkers, street
vendors and sex workers, a large
proportion of whom are women, people
of colour, LGBT people and
immigrants. Informal and
undocumented workers are most at
risk of falling into poverty and it
is important to protect their
livelihoods. Their exclusion from
social protections, often, violates
their right to social security
enshrined in international human
rights law.
Plans to reach vulnerable groups
should be developed in consultation
with civil society groups,
including, community-based
organisations, with experience
serving diverse groups of people
living in poverty. Governments
should, also, clearly communicate
their economic relief plans to the
public and clarify eligibility,
timelines and procedures.
::: What Should Governments Do to
Protect People From Losing Their
Homes and Other Basic Services :::
::: Governments need to ensure that
people do not lose access to
adequate housing and implement
measures, such as, legislative,
administrative, policy or spending
priorities, to prevent homelessness,
especially, for those, who are
economically and socially at-risk.
These can include direct financial
assistance for or deferral of rental
and mortgage payments; moratoriums
on evictions due to arrears; rental
stabilisation or reduction measures;
and suspending utility costs and
cut-offs for inability to pay and
debt collection. Suspension or grace
periods should include reasonable
measures to ensure that people can
pay accumulated outstanding
balances.
Governments could, also, delay or
cancel for a given time period taxes
or contributions, that negatively
affect people’s rights and use tax
cuts and subsidies for or direct
provision of, basic commodities,
such as, food, that are affected by
price increases.
Countries should, also, consider
supporting those, facing accumulated
debt, who otherwise would have to
give up essential services because
they have lost their jobs, have to
stop work because of illness or see
their pay checks cut and are
struggling to pay mortgages and
other loans and utility and medical
bills. Countries should, also,
consider restricting negative credit
reporting during the pandemic and
for a period of time after. Negative
credit reports can follow and affect
an individual’s ability to get
credit, jobs and housing for many
years.
::: What About the Accessibility and
Affordability of Care :::
Governments should ensure that
testing and any treatment or
vaccines developed for Covid-19 are
affordable and accessible to
everyone, while, also, ensuring that
hospitals and healthcare providers
have the resources needed to provide
care. In many countries in
sub-saharan Africa, the lack of
investment in health makes it
difficult to monitor new cases and
to provide sufficient testing and
treatment. But, even, in countries
with sufficient resources, people
may delay or not seek treatment, if,
services are not affordable. In the
United States, more than 137 million
people faced financial hardship
because of their medical bills,
even, before the pandemic and
medical issues contribute to
two-thirds of bankruptcies. The
right to the highest attainable
standard of health includes
affordable care and access to health
facilities for all on an equal basis
to prevent, treat and control
epidemic diseases.
Other forms of essential health
care, including, sexual and
reproductive health care, also, need
to continue and remain physically
and financially accessible
throughout the pandemic. In Uganda,
the combined ban on public and
private transport and a scarcity of
public ambulances cost the lives of
several women in labour. Many older
people and people with disabilities
rely on uninterrupted home and
community services and support.
Public agencies, community
organisations, healthcare providers
and other essential service
providers need to be able to
continue performing essential
functions to meet their needs.
Government strategies should
minimise disruption in services and
develop contingent sources for
comparable services. Disruption of
community-based services can result
in the institutionalisation of
persons with disabilities and older
people, which can lead to negative
health impacts.
::: How Should Governments Provide
Assistance to Businesses :::
Providing businesses with financial
support to weather the economic
impacts of the crisis is important.
And tying financial support to
businesses with protection for
workers can reduce unemployment and
sudden losses of income, which can
help sustain an adequate standard of
living for workers. Assistance
should go to both formal and
informal businesses, especially,
people, who work on their own, many
of them women and people with
disabilities and small and medium
size enterprises.
Meaningful oversight is needed to
ensure that funds are not misspent
and are appropriately used to
protect workers. Governments can
require businesses, that receive
financial support to maintain
payroll and other commitments to
workers, including, sub-contracted
workers and where labour rights
protections are lacking, ensure that
every worker has paid sick and
family leave, occupational health
and safety and where applicable,
childcare, health insurance, and
other protection measures.
Bailouts could be conditional on
firms paying their taxes, keeping
workers on their payroll, paying
them a living wage and continuing
benefits like health insurance in
countries where that is a key
employment benefit, and providing
safe workplaces and personal
protective equipment as recommended.
::: What Steps Should Governments
Take to Ensure Transparency
Oversight and Accountability of
Relief Funds :::
Emergency funding is, especially,
vulnerable to corruption and misuse
because of the urgency and scale of
government spending and the
underlying emergency situation can
overwhelm or hinder oversight,
allowing powerful actors to take
advantage of the crisis for their
own benefit. To prevent corruption
or misuse, governments should
restrict, who, may, benefit from
funds to avoid conflicts of
interest, ensure that all spending
is transparent, appoint independent
auditors to oversee spending
decisions and hold people
accountable where appropriate.
Conflict-of-interest restrictions
should prevent senior government
officials or their close relatives,
from personally profiting from
loans, grants or public contracts
channelled through companies in
which they have significant stakes.
Governments should make public the
amount they spend on various
programmes and major beneficiaries
of funds. They should, also, publish
procurement processes, including,
the names of companies awarded
public contracts and their
beneficial owners. With rare
exceptions, all procurement
processes should be competitive and
final delivery of goods should be
verified.
Governments should appoint
independent auditors or inspectors
general to oversee emergency funding
and their reports should be made
public. All credible evidence of
corruption or misuse should be
promptly investigated and those
found responsible should be held
accountable.
::: What Should Governments Do in
the Medium and Long-term :::
The pandemic has exposed structural
social and economic inequalities and
vast holes in social protection.
While immediate support is
important, medium and long-term
targeted support will be needed. As
countries are starting to ease
lockdown restrictions and let
moratoriums protecting low-income
tenants and homeowners lapse,
economic recovery, that benefits
everyone will depend on improved
social protection and broad-based
fiscal support. This includes public
investment in health care, social
protection and infrastructure.
Recovery plans should take into
account ways in which some groups
have suffered more than others
during the pandemic and work to
ensure that economic recovery seeks
to correct the inequities, that led
to disparities in the first place.
The following aspects are,
particularly, important:
::: Set up more expansive and
inclusive social protection
measures, ensuring everyone’s right
to social security. Entitlement to
social protection is, often,
conditional on participation in the
formal labour market, putting it
beyond some people’s reach.
Countries have temporarily extended
social protection to varying degrees
and have taken first steps toward
universal coverage.
In
the United States, for example,
unemployment benefits were extended
to many workers previously
ineligible for such protections,
including, those working in the
‘gig’ economy or people, who provide
home care or domestic work. For the
first four months of the pandemic,
benefits were made more generous, so
that those, who lost work received
$600 per week in addition to any
amount to which they are eligible
under state law.
In
the Philippines, conditions for
access to cash transfers have been
waived and new programmes have been
introduced, which quadrupled social
protection coverage from
pre-Covid-19 levels. Making some of
these temporary life-lines permanent
can provide better financial
security for people during future
economic uncertainty.
Social and economic support,
including, childcare and paid sick
and family leave, should reach all
essential workers as part of medium
to long-term measures and recovery.
Such support is, especially,
necessary to ensure the health and
well-being of essential workers.
Spend on protecting economic rights
instead of abusive austerity.
Supporting the recovery with fiscal
tools while managing higher
government debt levels is a delicate
balancing act. The pandemic and its
economic fallout, along with policy
responses, have contributed to a
major increase in fiscal deficits
and government debt ratios. As
countries ease restrictions and
enter the recovery phase, they
should consider progressive taxation
and strengthen public institutions
rather than pursuing austerity
measures.
The experiences of various countries
following the 2008 financial crisis
have shown that many austerity
policies entrenched inequalities and
harmed fulfilment of an adequate
standard of living. The economically
vulnerable were hit the hardest as
social protection systems were
weakened, jeopardising a country’s
ability to adequately respond to
human rights obligations. In the UK,
researchers have related austerity
to an increase in homelessness, the
number of people in poverty and food
insecurity. Countries should learn
from these results, with progressive
public spending on health and social
protection replacing austerity
policies.
Some countries have introduced
temporary measures to find housing
for those, who are homeless or lack
adequate housing. These have been
very successful but risk being
reversed. As governments end
emergency measures and let
moratoriums on evictions and
foreclosures lapse, they should
create programmes to guarantee
everyone’s right to adequate
housing, address and prevent
homelessness and protect people from
unfair evictions.
Improve tax collection and consider
progressive taxes. To ensure
adequate funding for progressive
spending, governments should improve
tax enforcement and collection
practices. Countries should review
whether rates are equitable and
appropriate to generate necessary
resources to assess whether they
should reinstate or impose new
progressive taxes. Property owners
or landlords, who have waived rent
or entered rent agreements in which
the landlord bears the economic
brunt could be considered tax exempt
for the time of the waiver or
special rental agreement.
Ensure equitable access to re-entry
to employment. After the 2008
financial crisis, most of the jobs,
that were lost permanently were
low-income jobs. Older workers,
especially, older women and
minorities, were least likely to be
rehired. Governments should develop
strategies to ensure full employment
and wage growth so that low-income
workers are not disproportionally
harmed in the long run. This could
be done via public employment
programmes, specifically, for
sectors with unemployment rates,
that are substantially higher than
the average and with large
concentrations of low-income
workers.
Enshrine the right to an adequate
standard of living in law. Countries
need to give an effective remedy to
those denied an adequate standard of
living. A key element of the right
is ensuring that everyone has
sufficient income to be able to
afford an adequate standard of
living. This can be done through
various routes, including: i: social
security, ii: living wage or iii:
guaranteed minimum income.
::: Section Three: International
Assistance :::
::: How Are International Financial
Institutions Supporting Countries to
Meet their Human Rights Obligations
:::
::: International assistance is
crucial for protecting livelihoods
and economies, especially, in
countries with fewer resources. The
World Bank Group has provided a S$14
billion package of fast-track
financing to assist companies and
countries to respond quickly to
Covid-19. The package includes
support for public health
preparedness, as well as, support to
private companies struggling with
disruptions in supply chains. The
World Bank Group noted that it ‘is
prepared to deploy up to $160
billion over the next 15 months to
support Covid-19 measures, that will
help countries respond to immediate
health consequences of the pandemic
and bolster economic recovery’.
Other financial institutions,
providing development assistance,
both multi-lateral and bilateral,
have committed over $90 billion in
response to the pandemic. In
addition to providing policy advice
and technical assistance, the
International Monetary Fund:IMF has
doubled its emergency fund to meet
expected demand of about $100
billion. Over 100 countries have
already requested emergency
assistance from the IMF, the highest
number in its 75-year history.
Unlike the Fund’s standard
programmes, emergency funds are
generally disbursed in lump sums,
with limited, if any, transparency,
conditions or reviews. The IMF is,
also, providing a six-month debt
service relief to 25 of the ‘poorest
and most vulnerable countries ’to
help them utilise their resources
for medical and other relief
efforts.
While the rapid response by
international financial institutions
is important, the human rights
implications of the financial
assistance are not clear. There are
gaps in transparency and
accountability requirements. In many
cases financial support is going to
countries with poor human rights
records. This raises concern that
the financial assistance provided
will not reach those most in need.
::: What Should international
Financial Institutions Do to Ensure
That Assistance Reaches Those in
Need :::
Funding and support from
international financial institutions
for the Covid-19 response and during
the economic recovery period should
respect human rights and should lead
to opportunities for all,
especially, for those, who are most
in need and at-risk. Their funds
should support socio-economic
programmes like social protection
floors, minimum basic incomes,
adequate housing protections and
fiscal policies, that address rising
poverty and inequality and should be
targeted to previously marginalised
groups, including, women. They
should ensure that Covid-19 related
responses do not redirect resources
from financial commitments and
support, that had been earmarked for
‘vulnerable’ populations prior to
the pandemic.
As
countries enter the recovery phase,
international financial institutions
should depart from the dogmas of
austerity and instead encourage
public spending in health and social
protection to safeguard the rights
of those most at risk, thus,
ensuring greater societal resilience
in the event of a second wave of
Covid-19 or a future public health
crisis. They should prioritise
strengthening public institutions to
support services, that promote
health and universal access to
essential services.
::: What Should International
Financial Institutions Do to
Increase Oversight and Uphold
Safeguards Transparency and
Accountability :::
To
reach those most in need and keep
the country’s elite from taking the
money, international financial
institutions should publish all
information, related to support
programmes as soon as possible. They
should, also, make clear both in
private meetings with governments
and through high-level public
statements, that they will only
support governments that demonstrate
continued commitment to good
governance.
Governments should make all
information about how emergency
relief funds are spent available to
internal auditors and to independent
auditors. Priority should be given
to critical areas such as health,
public procurement, infrastructure
and social security expenditures.
Human Rights Watch is a member of
the Coalition for Human Rights in
Development, a global coalition of
98 social movements, grassroots
groups and civil society
organisations, advocating nationally
and internationally for development,
that respects human rights and is
community-led. Together with our
coalition partners, we have urged
international financial institutions
to:
::: uphold human rights standards,
including, through enforcement of
social and environmental safeguards;
::: adopt heightened transparency
and accountability standards, with
concerted effort to provide updates
to fill existing gaps in information
on an ongoing basis and timely
translations of project documents
into national and local languages of
affected communities;
::: assess anticipated human rights
risks and document heightened
environmental, social, inequality,
and violence risks in countries’
management plans during the Covid-19
pandemic;
::: indicate clearly and
systematically, which new projects
are Covid-19 crisis related and,
also, when existing projects are
being repurposed to respond to the
pandemic and its impacts; and
::: monitor for corrupt practices at
a level commensurate with the
heightened risk of misuse and
misappropriation of funds in crises.
Human Rights Watch and 43 other
organisations, also, wrote to the
International Finance
Corporation:IFC, urging it to take a
series of steps to help its clients
avoid, minimise or revisit
retrenchment decisions and to align
with IFC Performance Standards and
international labour and human
rights standards. The organisations
urged the IFC to build upon its
interim advice with binding steps
and monitoring to promote paid sick
and family leave, job protection,
employer-provided childcare and
health care, occupational health and
safety, and non-discriminatory
retrenchment, in the event this is
needed.
The organisations, also, urged the
IFC to follow and build on the good
practice of the World Bank and
create a dedicated website to
publish information about all
clients, receiving IFC Covid-19
response financing either directly
or through financial intermediaries,
and those clients, that are
substantially revising their
projects in response to Covid-19.
Human Rights Watch and nearly 100
other human rights and
anti-corruption organisations have
urged the IMF to mitigate risks,
such as, hidden contracts,
overpricing and collusion,
governments should be provided with
support and commit, at a minimum,
to:
::: publish all public contracts;
::: use open and competitive
bidding and strictly limit the use
of emergency non-competitive
processes;
::: publish the names and beneficial
ownership information of companies
awarded contracts; and
::: empower anti-monopoly agencies,
where they exist, to monitor market
conditions in critical sectors to
avoid collusion or overpricing.
||
Free Annual Subscription to The Humanion Portable Daily For
Students: Workers: Unwaged: Journalism and Media Workers ||
||
Readmore ||
:::ω:::
||
reginehumanicsfoundation.com
||
010720
|| Up ||
