Home WORLD WWF admits it feels “sad” over the abuse of human rights

WWF admits it feels “sad” over the abuse of human rights

0

[ad_1]

BuzzFeed News has reporters from all over the world to bring you trustworthy stories and explosive investigations. To help make this news free, become member.


A lengthy, long-delayed report revealed on Tuesday that one of the world’s largest charities has known for years that it is funding suspected human rights violations, but has repeatedly failed to resolve the issue.

BuzzFeed News Survey The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), which was first exposed in March 2019, is a beloved non-profit organization with a cute panda logo. How to fund and equip park rangers, accusing them of assault, torture, sexual assault, and murder. people.In response, WWF immediately Commission An “independent review” led by former UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay.

160 pages of comments, now Publish online, Which confirmed the problem in BuzzFeed News Nepal, Cameroon, This the republic of Congowith Democratic Republic of Congo.The report claimed that the group was Coronavirus disease The pandemic went from travel to the location where abuse was reported.

The review found that WWF has repeatedly failed to follow its “its own commitment to respect human rights.” These commitments are not only required by law, but also essential for “protecting nature.”


Do you have any suggestions for things the public should know? Send an email to the author via [email protected] or [email protected] Or, you can contact safely on tips.buzzfeed.com.


in a statement In response to this comment, WWF expressed “deep and unreserved sadness for those suffering” and stated that the abuse of park rangers “feared us and violated all the values ​​we represent. The charity acknowledged its shortcomings and welcomed the suggestions, stating that “we can and will do more.”

Pillay’s comment declined to say whether the executives found by BuzzFeed News Aware of “accelerating” violence As early as January 2018, at least one wildlife park was responsible for the charity’s mistakes.

In the Congo Basin, in the “especially weak” work done by WWF in fulfilling its human rights commitments, wildlife charities did not conduct full investigations into reports of murder, rape and torture due to concerns about government partners Will react negatively to the investigation. The team found out. Even after learning about similar and frightening allegations, WWF has provided technical and financial support to park rangers (known locally as “ecology guards”) around the world, and in some cases, Damn comment Activities commissioned by the non-profit organization itself confirmed “serious and widespread” reports of abuse.

The report found that despite allegations of torture, rape, and murder by park officials from the early 2000s to July this year, Nepal “did not inform WWF of the official mechanism allegedly abused in the anti-poaching mission during the anti-poaching mission. “. Defeated an indigenous youth And destroyed the houses of the local community. The report said: “WWF needs to know what is happening where it works” in order to implement its human rights policy.

Frank Binewald/Getty Images

A river in the Chitwan National Park in Nepal.

The report found that, in general, WWF did not pay much attention to credible allegations of abuse, did not establish a victim complaint system, and portrayed an overly optimistic picture of its anti-poaching war in public communication. The author of the report wrote: “Unfortunately, WWF’s commitment to the implementation of its social policies has not been fully and consistently observed.”

WWF has been committed to combating wildlife crimes for decades. Although local governments formally hire and pay forest rangers who patrol national parks and protect wildlife reserves, in many countries in Africa and Asia, WWF has provided important funding to make their work possible . Charity organizations have opposed poaching in the fierce war.

in a Multi-part series, BuzzFeed News found that the WWF’s poaching war was accompanied by civilian casualties: impoverished villagers living near the park. At the time, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) responded that many of BuzzFeed’s claims “do not match our understanding of the incident”-but the charity quickly revised many of its human rights policies after publication.

In the United States, this series of cases triggered bipartisan investigations. suggested Legislation that prohibits the government from providing money to international protection organizations that fund or support human rights violations.It also prompted The Ministry of the Interior freezes funds, Reviewed by the Government Accountability Office, and conducted government investigations in the United Kingdom and Germany.

The new review provides more suggestions for charities to improve their oversight, including hiring more human rights experts, conducting more stringent due diligence before working on protection projects, and working with WWF’s government and law enforcement partners. Sign human rights commitments in this field and establish an effective complaint mechanism. The system makes it easier for indigenous people to report abuse.

The review found that until 2018, WWF’s network of offices around the world did not have “consistent and unified efforts” to “resolve complaints about human rights violations.”

Many of the team’s findings point directly to the highest level: “The commitment to fulfill the responsibility to respect human rights should be approved at the highest level of the agency,” the team wrote. Although all WWF offices in the Congo Basin are directly managed by WWF International, its staff at the Swiss Grande headquarters rarely supervise the organization’s work in the country.

WWF International also did not provide clear guidance to local offices on how to fulfill its human rights commitments. For example, there are no network-wide regulations on how to work with law enforcement officers and park rangers. As a result, each planning office “sets or does not develop a code of conduct, training materials, conditions for supporting rangers, and procedures for responding to allegations of abuse.”

The expert panel wrote: “Ultimately, the responsibility lies with WWF International and the entire WWF network to ensure that allegations of human rights violations by ecological protectors to whom WWF provides financial and technical support are properly resolved.”

Ezequiel Becerra/Getty Images

Marco Lambertini, International Director-General of WWF

In October last year, BuzzFeed News showed that Director General Marco Lambertini and Chief Operating Officer Dominic O’Neill Personal review The report commissioned by WWF records the “accelerated” violence in Cameroon by guards supported by WWF. The report was sent to high-level individuals in January 2018, more than a year after BuzzFeed News began to expose similar abuses. However, Pillay’s comments hardly mention whether WWF executives are responsible for the failure of the charity.

On the contrary, the focus of the review is the complex system of WWF. Under this system, even if WWF International is legally responsible, each planning office has to cooperate with “very limited countries under the consultation or supervision of WWF International.” The expert panel wrote that this obscured “clear responsibilities and division of responsibilities”, leading to “difficulties and confusion” and “ineffective” human rights resolution attempts.

The panel of experts could not find a single contract between WWF International and its partner countries that contained provisions on human rights responsibilities or the rights of indigenous peoples.

The team also criticized the WWF press conference in detail, stating that it needs to “be more active in facing the challenges it faces” and “in the face of allegations of human rights violations related to the activities it supports.” , How it reacts more transparently”. In some cases, “it is clear that in order to avoid arousing criticism, WWF has decided not to publish a commissioned report, does not value the information received or exaggerates the validity of its proposed response.”

Internal attention to promoting “good news” seems to “lead to a culture” in which the program office “has been reluctant to share or promote all of their allegations of human rights violations due to concerns about donors or donors’ concerns. Knowledge. Offended national partners.” The report said. “The challenges that WWF faces in promoting the protection and respect of human rights should be more transparent internally and externally, both internally and externally. Equally important is the effectiveness or lack of effectiveness of efforts to overcome these challenges, It must be more straightforward.”

The report drew immediate criticism from prominent personalities, who said that it did not fully acknowledge the charity’s responsibility for the abuse of indigenous people. Stephen Corry, director of Survival International, a tribal rights advocacy organization, said: “This report echoes the previous response of the WWF, blaming the’government rangers’.”

A spokesperson for the British Tropical Rainforest Foundation said that WWF’s response to the report “failed to take responsibility for WWF’s shortcomings” and “or apologizes to many individuals who have suffered human rights violations in their name.”

The Forest People’s Project, an indigenous people’s rights organization that reports abuse to WWF, said the report shows that all wildlife charities must seriously think about themselves.

“Forest Project Coordinator Helen Tugendhat (Helen Tugendhat) said: “The human rights violations suffered by indigenous peoples and local communities listed in the report highlight the fundamental problems that have emerged in the entire protection sector, rather than being isolated World Wildlife Fund. “We urge other conservation organizations and conservation funding providers to read this report carefully and evaluate and modify their own practices. “

[ad_2]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here