Protecting, respecting and promoting gender equality and sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) is central to Swedish international development cooperation. In many contexts, the increased politicisation of and backlash against these rights has led to increased personal insecurity for human rights defenders and to the revocation of previously won rights and freedoms.
In a recently published working paper, Sofia Kahma shows how the so-called ‘anti-rights’ or ‘anti-gender’ movement affects the rights-based work of three international civil society organisations that are partners of Sida.
Summary
Recent years have seen an increase in the number and organisational and financial strength of actors working to revoke the protection of sexual and gender-related rights. Activists, scholars, and practitioners alike have sounded the alarm about the efforts currently being made to dismantle respect for issues such as sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), gender equality, abortion, family planning and LGBTQI+ rights. While many claim it to have begun among ultraconservatives among the religious (and radical) right in the US as well as in the Vatican, the ‘anti-rights’ or ‘anti-gender’ movement has now spread globally, establishing local branches and forging alliances in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. This includes regions and countries that Sweden, through its development cooperation, provides development finance and support to. The question here is how the backlash against SRHR and gender equality affects Sida’s civil society partners, and how do they overcome the challenges that the rise of the anti-rights movement presents?
In the working paper, Sofia Kahma shed light on these issues through five interviews with three of Sida’s CSO partners. For security reasons, the names of the (organisations and) informants (representing them) have been left out. The findings suggest that the CSOs’ experience of the backlash, at least partly, depends on the institutional level at which they operate. The informants report having their funding blocked by conservative governments; being targeted by anti-rights intimidations attempts; and having anti-rights actors infiltrate and disrupt their activities and events. At the level of the UN, the informants reported similar experiences, for example, that anti-rights actors (both traditional and previously considered ‘gender champions’) are calling for the defunding of important UN institutions; are infiltrating their UN events and are purposefully stalling or sabotaging important resolutions on gender equality, SRHR, and LGBTQI+ rights. At the local level, informants reported experiencing the backlash in terms of an increased level of physical and psychological violence; state and civilian attacks on LGBTQI+ visibility; and through the active role played by local religious leaders.
The working paper concludes that the effect of the backlash against sexual and gender-related rights is dependent on both the size of the organisation (big and well-funded vs. smaller and less funded) and its institutional level. The paper also identifies a set of strategies or responses used by the organisations when facing opposition from anti-rights actors. The ability of organisations to respond to these attacks is again conditioned on their size and level of operation, but also on whether they are engaged in activities and issues that attract attention or awareness by the general public. The informants mentioned how their organisations have created networks and collaborations, both formal and informal, with likeminded actors, increased their preparedness and set up security measures, increased their creativity and flexibility in dealing with their partners, and are working strategically to expose the work, funding, and ideas of the anti-rights movement. Thus, while limited in scope, this working paper describes how that Sida’s CSO partners are negatively affected by the ongoing attack on sexual and gender-related rights and that they have had to adapt their operations and activities to a new, more hostile, landscape. Given that the informants stated that this backlash is just one of several other global phenomena negatively impacting their ability to work on topics related to SRHR, gender equality, and LGBTQI+, the findings indicate that Sida’s partners are currently under great pressure and that this in turn could affect the effectiveness of Swedish aid.
This report identifies four aspects that members of the donor community or other actors interested in supporting civil society should consider, based on the findings.
1) Flexibility facilitates
Firstly, donors should consider increasing or promoting flexibility and creativity in their relationships with and management of their CSO partners. This could then allow the CSOs to maintain, adapt, or even advance their operations when faced with backlash from the anti-rights movement.
2) Security measures are costly
Secondly, donors need to be aware of how the backlash has produced higher security risks for their partners, and that these, in turn, come with additional costs. Understanding how the backlash has resulted in an increased level of physical and psychological violence can be the first step towards strengthening the resilience and security of civil society. Donors should consider increasing their funding of CSOs. This implication is based on the fact that the backlash has forced CSOs to route funding away from planned activity and towards risk mitigation, which leaves them with fewer resources to conduct their normal operations. It is further supported by the reports of how the anti-rights movement is increasingly well-funded and that more resources are likely to be needed in order to combat them in the future.
3) Networks and collaboration
Third, donors should encourage their partners to create networks with like-minded actors, especially among vulnerable communities and actors in hostile environments. Networks and alliances can help CSOs deal with the negative consequences of the backlash and function as a tool for combatting the rise of the anti-rights movement.
4) Attacks on SRHR are attacks on human rights
Lastly, the working paper highlights the importance of addressing attacks against human rights horizontally and to understand the interconnectedness of the protection and respect for ‘overall’ human rights and sexual and gender-related rights.