The Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders (MEA),
created in 1993, is granted annually to someone who has demonstrated an
exceptional record of combating human rights violations by courageous
and innovative means. The award aims at encouraging Human Rights
Defenders (HRDs) who are at risk and therefore in need of immediate protection.
This protective publicity requires media attention, particularly in the
country of origin of the laureate. The prize money of at least 20’000
Swiss Francs is to be used for further work in the field of human
rights. The Martin Ennals Foundation is a unique collaboration among ten
of the world's leading human rights NGOs, who form the JURY:
Amnesty International; Human Rights Watch; International Federation of
Human Rights; World Organisation Against Torture; Front Line;
International Commission of Jurists; Human Rights First; International
Service for Human Rights; Diakonie Germany; HURIDOCS.
ARE HUMAN RIGHTS AWARDS REALLY EFFECTIVE?
To answer that, one has to know in
which way a human rights award intends to help. In the first place,
almost all awards want to give recognition and encouragement at the
moral and psychological level. This goal should not be trivialized as
activists often have to work in environments that are not appreciative
of their efforts, and the causes they defend can be unpopular even
within their own social circles. Secondly, many awards come with a
measure of direct financial support, which can be of great importance as
even relatively small amounts go far in cash-strapped organisations,
often based in developing countries. Finally, the most important but
also the most elusive goal is to provide protection. Unlike the first two goals, the latter is not really possible without a fair degree of publicity.
THERE ARE MANY HUMAN RIGHTS AWARDS; WHAT IS SPECIAL ABOUT THE MEA?
Many cities, countries and
organisations, national and international, have some kind of human
rights award; there exist probably hundreds of them. However, only a few
focus specifically on Human Rights Defenders (HRDs), have an 18-year track record and are truly international. The MEA has a Jury composed of ten international human rights organisations, including the most influential. This makes it the award of the whole movement.
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE WITH THE NOBEL PRIZE?
The Nobel Peace Prize is intended for
contributions to ‘peace’, not necessarily ‘human rights’. One could even
say that on a few occasions in the past, it has been awarded to
individuals merely because they stopped violating human rights. Still,
many laureates can safely be said to belong to the category of HRDs. In
terms of impact, the 100-year old Nobel Prize is a case apart, and it
would be wrong to compare other awards only with this special case. But
the huge impact of the Nobel Peace prize continues to inspire others.
DOES THE MEA SUCCEED IN GETTING PROTECTIVE PUBLICITY?
Yes, and increasingly so, but the
modalities keep changing. In the beginning it was mostly through the
written press. From 2002-2006 the ceremony was partially or totally
broadcast by national and international televisions such as RTS and TV5.
International media networks such as Reuters, BBC, Voice of America and
Al-Jazeera interviewed the MEA laureates. Most importantly, these
interviews are broadcast in the country/region of origin of the
laureates. This was the case of an interview of Aktham Naisse, MEA
Laureate 2005, which was extensively broadcast in Syria. Furthermore, as
from 2008 the images from the annual ceremony are recorded
professionally and broadcast via the internet as well as distributed on DVD, subtitled in several languages including those of the laureates.
IS THERE A RISK THAT THE PUBLICITY ENDANGERS THE LAUREATE?
It is sometimes suggested that human
rights awards could endanger the laureates. It is true that there is
always the risk of backfiring, but the best judge of the balance between
increased risk and greater protection remains the human rights defender
in question. And without exception they seem to regard publicity and
exposure foremost as a form of protection, perhaps reflecting also the
increased importance of the media even in tense situations. Upon
learning that she was the laureate for 2004, Lida Yusupova from the
Chechen Republic in the Russian Federation, said: “To be the
laureate of the Martin Ennals Award is not only an honour, it is also a
guaranty of security for my activities and my life”. The broad
composition and independent status of the MEA Jury is another factor
which makes it difficult for governments to portray the laureates as
‘stooges’ supported by foreign powers, which is easier to do when the
award is plainly a governmental award.
WHO ARE EXACTLY ‘HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS’?
There is an ‘official’ but broad
definition derived from the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders of 9
December (see UN Resolution 53/144 in document A/RES/53/144 of 8 March
1999). The MEA has adopted for its own use the following: “For the purpose of selecting candidates for the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders,
the Jury considers an eligible human rights defender (HRD) to be one
who risks or suffers victimisation, harassment or disadvantage for
exercising the rights expressed in the International Bill of Rights, and
who, in conformity with these instruments, promotes and protects the
human rights and fundamental freedoms of others, individually or in
groups.”
WHY FOCUS ON HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS?
Without the individual human rights
defender, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human
rights law risk to remain a dead letter. There are many such persons:
some lobbying discreetly for improvements, others demonstrating loudly.
However, some feel that they have to take tremendous personal risks by
publicly challenging the powers that be or bringing cases of victims to
court. These heroes often have to sacrifice more than their time and
energy, too many having been arrested, tortured and even killed. Almost
all human rights organisations have to some degree a mandate to come to
the succour of threatened colleagues.
IS IT RIGHT TO FOCUS SO MUCH ON INDIVIDUALS INSTEAD OF MOVEMENTS AND CAUSES?
When it comes to the actual
implementation at the grassroots level it is still the dedication and
courage of individual human beings that count most. The laureates
themselves tend to stress anyway the overriding importance of their team
and their cause. Also, ‘human interest’ stories (with film images) get
across much easier on individuals – with whom the audience can identify –
than on organisations. Bishop Tutu thought so with regard to apartheid and José Ramos-Horta acknowledged that his Nobel Prize lifted East-Timor’s cause out of the doldrums.
WHY IS THE MEA CEREMONY IN GENEVA?
The City of Geneva, which co-organizes
the annual ceremony since 2008, is an international hub for human rights
and humanitarian work and it is the “home” of key human rights
organizations and meetings such as the UN Human Rights Council. The
Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights – who usually
hands over the award – is also in Geneva. Four of the 10 NGOs on the
Jury have their seat in Geneva, while 3 have a field office there. The
Martin Ennals Foundation has its Secretariat in Geneva at the office of
one of the members on the Jury: first at HURIDOCS, and for the last
years at OMCT.
WHY IS THE MEA NOT GIVEN ON 10 DECEMBER (HUMAN RIGHTS DAY)?
10 December would indeed in many ways
be appropriate, but many organisations already organize activities of
their own at national and international level. The MEA – as a
collaborative project – would not want to be in direct competition with
its own members. Moreover, 10 December is also the day of the Nobel
Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo. (Alfred Nobel died on 10 December 1896
and therefore that day is ‘Nobel Day’ in Sweden and Norway. Much later,
after the Second World War, the United Nations declared 10 December to
be International Human Rights Day and designated 21 September as the
International Day of Peace. The curious result is that the Peace prize is given on International Human Rights Day.)
DO HUMAN RIGHTS AWARDS USUALLY GET PUBLICITY?
Yes, to some extent, but most human
rights awards tend to obtain publicity in the countries where the awards
are given. However, from the protection point of view, the most crucial publicity would be at the local level, in the country of the human rights activist in question. The award givers
may want to see the name of their organisation or sponsor referred to
in the media of their own country (usually in the West) but the
recipients of the award are better served by attention and recognition
in their own countries, often in the South with a low level of literacy
and limited independent press. Hence the importance of the use of the
mass media (in particular border-crossing radio, television and
internet) and the language of the laureates. A good illustration of
effective local publicity is the decision by the European Union to
instruct its representative in the country of origin of the MEA laureate
to give a public reception in her or his honour.
DOES THE AMOUNT OF PRIZE MONEY MATTER?
The prize money of the MEA, at least
20’000 Swiss Francs, is not the main element in providing protection.
Still, this amount is meaningful, especially in developing countries, and useful as
it is to be used freely by the laureates for their human rights’ work.
Many laureates have used some of the prize money to tour capitals and
meet political decision-makers.
HOW IS THE MEA FUNDED?
Being truly international and
independent means also that there is not a single entity (country, city
or organisation) that provides the core funding. The Martin Ennals
Foundation has a group of partners – some of them on a multi-year basis
– but the long-term prospects remain fragile. The City of Geneva is a
specially important partner as it takes on the main costs (in kind and
services) for the organisation of the annual ceremony. It should also be
noted that the MEA is a cost-efficient project. The full costs of
running the MEA are not reflected in the budget as many crucial inputs
are voluntary (such as the key position of the Chairman and the
involvement of other Board members). Moreover, the organisations on the
Jury undertake most research and publicity work; in addition they
contribute an annual fee to cover 10% of the running costs.
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MEA AND THE MEF?
The Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders is abbreviated to MEA. The
fully autonomous Jury of the MEA – which selects the laureates – is
composed of the representatives of 10 key human rights NGOs and a
permanent, non-voting Chair. The MEF is the
Martin Ennals Foundation, a legal entity under Dutch law, with a Board
composed of 8 individuals. The MEF provides the legal and administrative
underpinning of the MEA. The Secretariat of the MEF-MEA is in Geneva.
The Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders Nomination Form for 2013
| Procedures & Guidelines | ||
| - The goal of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders (MEA) is to extend recognition and protective publicity to those who are currently involved in front line work for the promotion and protection of human rights. The Award aims to encourage individuals and – exceptionally – organisations who are currently working for the rights of others in conditions hostile to fundamental human rights and who are in need of protection. Special account is taken of those who have demonstrated an active record of combating human rights violations by courageous and innovative means. | ||
| - Deadline: Nominations for next year's award should reach the Martin Ennals Foundation (MEF) by 9th December. Receipt of nominations will not be acknowledged | ||
| - The selection of the winning candidates is made by the Jury of the Martin Ennals Foundation. The announcement of the nominees is made around mid March and that of the laureates is made in early May. The proceedings of the Jury of the MEA are confidential and no correspondence about the selection procedure will be accepted. | ||
| - Anybody can nominate any individual or organisation by filling out the appropriate form. Neither individuals nor organisations may nominate themselves or act as referee for themselves. Three referees are needed for a valid nomination and these persons must have agreed to act as such. | ||
| - Definition of ‘Human Rights Defenders’: “For the purpose of selecting candidates for the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders, the Jury consider an eligible human rights defender (HRD) to be one who risks or suffers victimisation, harassment or disadvantage for exercising the rights expressed in the International Bill of Rights, and who, in conformity with these instruments, promotes and protects the human rights and fundamental freedoms of others, individually or in groups.” | ||
| - No posthumous award is given (except when a candidate has already passed the first round). | ||
| - The candidate should not use or advocate violence. | ||
| - The nominations form asks for basic personal information on the candidate. Additional information (such as a CV) can be sent as a separate document to info@martinennalsaward.org. In this regard, other support material (such as press clippings, audio or video files) will be appreciated and should be sent as attachments or links to the above email address. Any hard copy documentation sent to the Secretariat (Martin Ennals Foundation, c/o OMCT, P.O. Box 21, 1211 Geneva 8, Switzerland) should be copies as none will be returned. | ||
| - The MEF and the NGOs on the Jury may request further information and documentation concerning candidates |
Moreinfo:
