CEDAW training seminar, 7 – 9 December 2007, Taipei
A New Way Forward: Taiwan and CEDAW
Firstly I’d like to thank all of you for being here, and I’m also very glad to have the opportunity to speak to you today about the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, or CEDAW for short.
I acknowledge and applaud the fact that, despite the rejection of Taiwan’s bid for UN membership, legislation on accession to CEDAW was passed in Taiwan's Legislative Yuan on 5 January this year, and that President Chen Shui-bian signed the legislation and issued an Instrument of Accession on 9 February.[1] This speaks volumes for the level of Taiwan’s commitment to the principles of CEDAW, and it is important that groups such as NCW (Taiwan) build on this.
Today, I will be giving you a quick introduction to CEDAW, which I hope will help you all in various ways, whether when it comes to lobbying the government, as a guide for your own work, or simply as a means of understanding the United Nations and its human rights treaties better.
Locating CEDAW in history
I’d like to start by locating CEDAW’s place in history. CEDAW is one of seven (soon to be eight) international human rights treaties under the United Nations. The other six are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.
These treaties were wide-ranging and exhorted the equal rights of men and women, but one of their shortcomings was their failure to take into account the particular situation of women across states, cultures and classes. Its specific focus on women with regard to their political and matrimonial rights neglected the fact that women face discrimination on multiple fronts – education, work, health, citizenship and legal rights – the list goes on. CEDAW therefore sought to fill in the gaps by prioritizing areas which were key to women’s development as free individuals, and the introduction to the Convention states that CEDAW is ‘often described as an international bill of rights for women.’ The final draft of CEDAW was ready in 1979, and was signed by 64 states and ratified by two in 1980 before it came into effect in 1981.[2] Its 30 articles cover women’s economic, political and social rights, and also delve into more focused areas such as education, health, recreation, access to land, citizenship rights and matrimonial rights.
Articles of CEDAW
CEDAW opens with article 1, which defines the meaning of ‘discrimination against women. Articles 2 and 3 establish a comprehensive obligation to eliminate discrimination in all its forms in addition to the specific obligations under articles 5 to 16. Article 4(1)specifically provides for the adoption of temporary special measures in order to accelerate de facto equality between men and women. Temporary special measures, such as affirmative action measures and quotas, are not considered discriminatory. They may last for as long as the inequalities exist and shall be discontinued only when equality of result have been achieved. The other articles are:
Article 6: Trafficking in women and exploitation of prostitution;
Article 7: Participation of women in political and public life;
Article 8: Participation of women at the international level;
Article 9: Nationality (the statehood of women is guaranteed, irrespective of their marital status)
Article 10: Education;
Article 11: Employment;
Article 12: Health care and family planning;
Article 13: Economic and social benefits ( Articles 10, 11 and 13 affirm women’s rights to non-discrimination to education, employment and economic and social activities. These demands are given special emphasis with regard to the situation of rural women, whose particular struggles and vital economic contributions, as noted in article 14, warrant more attention in policy-planning.)
Article 14: Rural women;
Article 15: Equality before the law (Article 15 asserts the full equality of women in civil and business matters, demanding that all instruments directed at restricting women’s legal capacity “shall be deemed null and void”)
Article 16: Marriage and family relations
However, the concerns of those who had drawn up the earlier human rights treaties are still evident, hence the recognition of articles 2 and 16 of CEDAW as ‘core provisions of the Convention’.[3] Article 2 calls on states to incorporate the principle of gender equality in their constitutions, adopt legislation to prohibit discrimination against women and to protect women from discrimination, refrain from practising gender discrimination, take appropriate measures to eliminate it and also to repeal any present penal laws which constitute gender discrimination. Article 16 governs a woman’s right to enter into marriage, choose a spouse and gain a divorce. It also states that women have rights to decide on the number and spacing of their children, and to enjoy the same personal and property rights as their spouses. It also stipulates that a minimum age for marriage must be specified in legislation, and that the official registration of marriages be made compulsory. Article 2 is in essence the heart of the Convention, setting the tone for the articles which follow. It has very wide-ranging implications for states in terms of legislative changes and their social and economic impact – little wonder then that states have ratified the Convention with one hand and entered reservations to article 2 with the other.
General recommendations
General recommendations are authoritative statements by the Committee on the meaning of the provisions of the Convention with respect to the rights of women and the obligation of the States parties. They deal with issues related to specific articles and areas contained in the Convention. They are very useful in analysing how the meaning and extent of the provisions of the Convention have expanded over time and accordingly it is very important that the text of the Convention and the General Recommendations be read together.
To date there are 25 general recommendations, the most recent being on temporary special measures, which aims to clarify the nature and meaning of article 4 (1) in order to facilitate and ensure its full utilization by States parties in the implementation of the Convention.
The Committee’s general recommendations have interpreted rights progressively and developed new standards. For example , although gender-based violence is not addressed in the Convention, in general recommendation no. 19 adopted by the Committee in 1992 at its 11th session, it was made clear that gender-based discrimination, which impairs and nullifies the enjoyment by women of human rights and fundamental freedoms, is discrimination within the meaning of article 1 of the Convention. Gender-based violence may breach specific provisions of the Convention, regardless of whether those provisions expressly mention violence. Consequently States parties are required to include information relating to all forms of violence against women in their reports. This is a clear example of how through interpretation, the rights encompassed in the Convention have been expanded upon and can continue to be so.
The Committee is currently working on two other general recommendations: one on migrant women, and the other on equality in the context of article 2.
The CEDAW process
Reporting
How does CEDAW work for states which have ratified it? The process is a relatively straightforward one. Once a state has ratified CEDAW, it is obligated to submit an initial report to the CEDAW Committee one year after ratification, after which a periodic report is to be submitted every four years. The Committee, which is composed of 23 elected international experts, convenes three times a year to question states on the gaps in their implementation of the Convention. At the end of each session, concluding comments are issued to states parties, who are urged to take heed of and carry out the recommendations within. The Committee has always met at the United Nations headquarters in New York, but from next year onwards it will be moving to the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights in Geneva, where the secretariats of all the other human rights treaty bodies are located.
Concluding comments
The concluding comments are a very useful tool for states parties, as they are intended as a balanced, accurate reflection of the Committee’s views on the status of progress made by the reporting country. Concluding comments are both documents of praise and criticism – the Committee is always ready to acknowledge what a state has achieved in the time between its report submissions, but will also point out areas where the state is not fully in compliance with CEDAW and its principles. The Committee will also give specific suggestions and recommendations to the state party on how to improve the situation. The concluding comments are important and taken very seriously by the Committee, as states are questioned on submitting their next report if they have made any progress in implementing the recommendations made.
The Optional Protocol
CEDAW also has an Optional Protocol (OP), which contains 21 articles and has to be ratified separately from the Convention itself. Therefore, a state’s being party to CEDAW does not imply that it is also party to the OP. For individuals and/or groups in states which are party to the OP, it is an invaluable means through which complaints regarding cases of alleged gender discrimination can be filed, on the condition that all domestic remedies have been exhausted. The OP is a two-pronged instrument, and tackles cases of violations of the Convention through communications and inquiries.
Communications
‘Communications’ are complaints from individuals or groups who claim that their rights under the Convention have been violated. If the communication is considered admissible by the Committee, the Committee then examines the merits of the case before submitting its views and recommendations to the state party concerned. To date, the Committee has arbitrated over 10 communications. Optional Protocol cases can be delicate to deal with as one has to balance the many interests which are at stake, including those of the complainant (‘author’), the state party, its diplomats and NGOs. Two recent cases dealt with by the Optional Protocol Working Group, namely A.T. vs. Hungary and A.S. vs. Hungary, highlighted acutely the issues of domestic violence and forced sterilization. The individuals in both cases were unable to seek suitable redress within their domestic legal system, having exhausted all avenues, and successfully brought their cases before the CEDAW Committee.
Inquiries
Inquiries can be conducted ‘if the Committee receives reliable information indicating grave or systematic violations by a State Party of the rights set forth in the Convention…’. The state party is requested to submit its observations on the matter/s which have been brought to the Committee’s attention, and if need be, the Committee will designate one or more of its members to investigate the matter and report back to the Committee. Findings from the inquiry are passed to the state party with the Committee’s recommendations, and the state party is in turn required to respond to these recommendations. So far, one inquiry has been carried out in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, wherein the Committee acted upon information received from two NGOs on young female factory workers who were being sexually abused and murdered. After a period of investigation by two Committee members, recommendations were made to the Mexican government, which took heed of them and responded to the Committee accordingly on the measures it was taking to safeguard women’s rights in the area. Political will, therefore, is an essential criteria for such action.
CEDAW and Taiwan
How, then, is CEDAW relevant to Taiwan? I believe that the Convention would have received much publicity over the last few years in the time leading up to its signing by President Chen. It is now crucial to maintain interest in CEDAW, and to keep all parties concerned engaged in observing and implementing its principles.
I spoke in detail earlier about the individual articles in CEDAW. A possible strategy for the groups in NCW (Taiwan) is to keep yourselves aware and informed of areas delineated by CEDAW where women have fallen behind. Focus on areas where your knowledge, abilities and resources are best-suited to confront the issue, and start your work there. This way, I believe that progress can be made more rapidly, and NCW groups as well as those they are helping can see for themselves how CEDAW can be put into practice.
Vice-president Jane Prichard will be speaking later on how NGOs fit into the CEDAW process. NGOs fulfil a very important role in the CEDAW reporting process, and the Division for the Advancement of Women ensures that NGOs have a space are given time to make their views known to the Committee before their respective delegations come before the Committee. Therefore, NCW (Taiwan) and its affiliates can contribute to NGO shadow reports, and also come before the Committee to speak on issues which they feel their states have failed to address adequately.
Back to school: education and awareness-raising
While legal reforms and policy changes will set the tone for the government’s work, another important aspect which should not be omitted is education. CEDAW should not, and must not, remain strictly the domain of law-makers and academics. It is crucial that both men and women alike see CEDAW for what it is – a useful tool which is relevant to and has an impact on their lives.
Therefore, forums such as these are essential for spreading knowledge and educating people about CEDAW. An ideal state of affairs would see CEDAW being discussed by a wider range of people and organizations, despite the fact that Taiwan is unable to ratify the treaty. While CEDAW tends to be referred to as a ‘women’s law’ and thus assumed to the domain of women’s organizations, I believe that CEDAW is relevant not just to women’s organizations, but is also important for other civil society groups. NGOs should adopt a gender perspective when dealing with their respective issues. More general discussions should also be made available to the public to engage them on CEDAW, its various articles and their rights with reference to CEDAW.
With this, I wish all of you in NCW (Taiwan) the best in your endeavours towards making CEDAW a reality for the people of Taiwan.
Anamah Tan
President, International Council of Women
Member, United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
1
[1] ‘MediaCenter’, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Taiwan.
[2] ‘Fact Sheet No. 2 (Rev. 1), The International Bill of Human Rights’, Office of the High Commissioner of
Human Rights.
[3] ‘Reservations to CEDAW’, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women.