Turkey's Engagement with Global Women's Human Rights

Nüket Kardam

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN:
  9780815398691
• eBook ISBN:
  9781351143868
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: International Relations
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Examining the rise of global women's human rights and their interpretation and application to Turkey, Nüket Kardam provides an in-depth study that applies global norms - including women's empowerment, overcoming violence against women, and gender and good governance - to a specific locale in order to examine events post application. The volume examines whether a gender equality regime exists and looks into the Turkish attempt at compliance. Moreover, it analyzes the tension between abstract universalism, Western enlightenment values, and local values and identities, including the role of Islam regarding women's rights. This groundbreaking study also includes research on the women's movement in Turkey, its discourses and its relationship with the state from the 1980s onwards, during which time multilateral and bilateral donors, and the European Union came to exert more influence, and new civil society partnerships were formed with the state.

Chapter 1
The Emergence of a Global Women's Human Rights Regime and Turkey's Involvement

Introduction

It is necessary to first assess whether a global gender equality regime exists and how it was established before exploring Turkey's engagement with it. How this regime was formed, and the extent of its implementation has important implications for Turkey's response to it. International regimes are important because they embody mutually accepted norms. Thus, a regime constitutes a high level of acceptance by states that is close to international law. Gender issues have recently emerged as a global concern but scholars to date have not asked whether there is a global gender equality regime and if so, how it is identifiable, how it has arisen and is being implemented. Since the early 1980s, there has been an unprecedented rise in the importance accorded to gender equality issues in international forums. There is now a growing international understanding that gender equality is a prerequisite to the achievement of human and sustainable development. Over the past quarter century, the UN has convened five world conferences on women's issues, 1975 in Mexico City, 1980 in Copenhagen, 1985 in Nairobi, 1995 in Beijing and 2000 in New York. Each has marked a different stage of a process that has raised gender equality to the center of the global agenda. These conferences have highlighted that women lag behind in virtually all aspects of life (such as education, health, literacy, access to income, and labor markets) and established Platforms of Action for promoting gender equality.¹ These conferences have also provided a platform for women's NGOs and global women's networks to lobby for a gender perspective to be included in development policies and strategies. They have generated cross-cutting coalitions from all classes and economic groups from North and South with an unprecedented and indisputable effect on changing awareness and programs for women in many countries (Chen, 1996). In the two decades between Mexico City and Beijing, the way women are viewed in the development struggle has changed. Gender equality is embodied in an international legal instrument, the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which entered into force in 1981 and has been ratified by 178 countries — over 90 per cent of UN member states.² States have further established national women's machineries on gender issues (bureaucracies, departments, policies and programs) and some have changed laws and policies to follow up on global commitments. All of these developments point to the emergence of a regime.

The concept of regimes has been used to analyze global problems such as international financial exchanges, security and climate change (Krasner, 1983; Haas, 1990; Young, 1989 and 1991; Hansenclever et al, 1996). There is a wide literature on the factors that lead to regime formation, that affect regime maintenance and how regimes can be utilized to address global problems in the future.³ Furthermore, the tensions and contradictions among normative principles in international life and how states are embedded in dense networks of transnational and international relations that shape their perceptions and their preferences are being explored by scholars. But surprisingly, even though there is an extensive literature on global women's networks and the role of the UN as an ally, gender issues have not systematically been explored from the perspective of international regimes. Thus, this chapter addresses the following questions: a) Does a gender equality regime exist and how is it identifiable? b) If so, what factors have led to its formation? c) How is it maintained? What are its strengths and weakness in terms of implementation? d) Is Turkey a party to this regime and has it complied with its stipulations?⁴

Does a Gender Equality Regime Exist? How is it Identifiable?

I suggest that one could examine the rise and maintenance of a gender equality regime in terms of both its legal instruments and compliance mechanisms, and its underlying normative principles, that is, the tensions and contradictions of gender equality as a normative principle that has begun to shape perceptions and preferences of states. Virtually all discussions of international regimes proceed from the 'consensus definition' first proposed by Stephen Krasner. According to Krasner, regimes are:

implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules and decision-making procedures around which actors' expectations converge in a given area of international relations. Principles are beliefs of fact, causation and rectitude. Norms are standards of behavior defined in terms of rights and obligations. Rules are specific prescriptions or proscriptions for action. Decision-making procedures are prevailing practices for making and implementing collective choice.

(Krasner, 1983, p. 2)

This definition is not without its critics. One of the criticisms involves the precise meaning of and relationship among the four regime components. What distinguishes principles, norms, or rules of a regime from each other? The other problem arises from the phrase 'around which actors' expectations converge' which is considered too vague to provide explicit criteria when regimes exist or when they do not. How can we know when a regime exists in a given issue area or when it does not? The three distinct positions on how regimes can be identified have emerged over time and these argue that regimes are best identified on the basis of formal, behavioral and cognitive criteria, respectively (Hansenclever et al, 1996). These three criteria are examined below to see if a gender equality regime can be identified.

The Formal Approach: Principles, Norms, Rules and Decision-Making Mechanisms

Keohane has proposed that regimes are agreements in purely formal terms, or explicit rules agreed upon by more than one state and embodied in treaties or other documents. Regimes arise when states recognize these agreements as having continuing validity. A set of rules need not be 'effective' to qualify as a regime but it must be recognized as continuing to exist (Hasenclever et al, 1996, pp. 180-83). Turning to gender equality issues, one can identify an international gender equality regime in the form of explicit rules that are agreed upon by states and embodied in treaties and other documents such as platforms of action. The rules are the legal instruments created to formalize and implement the principles and norms of an international regime. Rules are derived from principles and norms and are usually codified into international law; we can observe efforts to implement and enforce them. The 'rules' of international regimes such as those found in 'Conventions' and 'Covenants' are legally binding once adopted and ratified by the appropriate decision-making body of a state. There are a number of conventions regarding women's status that deal with the human rights of women, but the definitive legal instrument on gender equality is the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). After being adopted unanimously by the General Assembly of the UN on 18 December 1979, it came into force in September 1981 after ratification by the twentieth state party. By September 2004, 178 states had ratified it. The other conventions include the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others; the Convention on the Nationality of Married Women; and the Convention on Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for Marriage and Registration of Marriages. The International Labor Organization (ILO) predates the UN in setting standards for the specific protection of women in the workforce, concerning such matters as maternity protection (1919), night work (1919), employment in underground mines (1935), the Convention Concerning Equal Remuneration of Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value, and the Convention on the Prohibition of Discrimination in Employment and Occupation and Workers with Family Responsibilities (ILO, 1994). These conventions remain in effect among ratifying states, but their purpose in protecting women's legal rights equally with those of men is incorporated into CEDAW, which is also described as an international bill of rights for women. Sex discrimination is also prohibited in the regional human rights conventions, such as the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and the African Charter on Human and People's Rights. Finally, the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence against Women (1994) is the first of its kind to define violence against women as a violation of women's human rights and identify the duties of states to address this endemic social problem. It defined violence against women as 'any act or conduct based on gender which causes death or physical, sexual, or psychological harm or suffering to women, whether in the public or private sphere'.⁵

These rules rest on a set of principles and norms and are accompanied by decision-making procedures, or monitoring mechanisms which oversee compliance. The basic principles that underpin the gender equality regime are the prohibition of all forms of discrimination against women, and the active promotion of equality between the sexes through women's empowerment. The active promotion of gender equality through women's empowerment goes beyond promotion of equality between genders towards an explicit recognition of unequal power relations between women and men. As Cook notes:

In contrast to previous human rights treaties, the Women's Convention frames the legal norm of prohibition of all forms of discrimination against women as distinct from sexual nondiscrimination. That is, it develops the legal norm from a sex-neutral norm that requires equal treatment of men and women, usually measured by how men are treated, to recognize the fact that the particular nature of discrimination against women and their distinctive characteristics are worthy of a legal response.

(Cook, 1997, p. 188)

For purposes of legal application and enforcement, CEDAW contains a legal definition of 'discrimination against women' in Article 1 of the Convention:

The term 'discrimination against women' shall mean any distinction, exclusion, or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.

(Cook, 1997, p. 189)

How do we determine what constitutes 'discrimination against women'? Cook provides these two questions:

Do the laws, policies, practices or other measures at issue make any distinction, exclusion or restriction on the basis of sex? If they do make such a distinction, exclusion or restriction, do they have the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms?

(Cook, 1997, p. 189)

The norms of a regime, on the other hand, define the rights and obligations of actors by establishing standards to overcome discrimination. The Nairobi Forward Looking Strategies and the 1995 Beijing Declaration and the Platform for Action both define the rights and obligations of governments and of international and regional organizations based on the principles of equality and non-discrimination. The Nairobi document was ground-breaking in the sense that it contained measures for achieving equality at the national level. Governments were to set their own priorities based on their development policies and resource capabilities. The Beijing Platform for Action aimed to accelerate the implementation of the Nairobi document and identified twelve critical areas for action: women and poverty; education and the training of women; women and health; violence against women; women and armed conflict; women and the economy; women in power and decision-making; institutional mechanisms for the advancement of women; human rights of women; women and the media; women and the environment; and the girl child. The documents that were adopted at these conferences establish the following norms for international organizations: increased development assistance for women by donor agencies, and strengthening and monitoring a whole range of actions on behalf of women. Obligations of governments are defined as the identification and elimination of obstacles to gender inequality in constitutional, legal, political and bureaucratic realms by means of political and legal reforms. These documents urged governments to translate the Platform for Action into national strategies with time-bound targets and benchmarks for monitoring.

Some key changes in norm development have taken place since 2000. On 31 October 2000, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1325, which develops an agenda for women, peace and security. It calls for the prosecution of crimes against women, increased protection of women and girls during war, the appointment of more women to UN peacekeeping operations and field missions and an increase in women's participation in decision-making processes at the regional, national and international level. This resolution outlines the actions to be taken by the Secretary General, the Security Council, UN departments and member states to 'mainstream gender' into peace and security policies and practices. SC 1325 is highly significant because it is the first time the Security Council has devoted an entire session to debating women's experiences in conflict and post-conflict situations. In 2002, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 57/179 on 'Working towards the elimination of crimes against women committed in the name of honor'. Violence continues to be viewed as a violation of human rights, which compels states to engage in international law in dealing with issues of violence. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) includes rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy in the definition of crimes against humanity and war crimes.⁶

Regimes would be incomplete without rules and decision-making procedures that reflect their norms and principles. By decision-making procedures are meant those supervisory and monitoring mechanisms that are established to formulate and enforce the rules. These include a variety of commissions, courts, expert groups whose jobs are to monitor compliance and sometimes apply sanctions. The Commission on CEDAW is entrusted with the responsibility to monitor compliance by ratifying state parties. Various other UN bodies act in a monitoring capacity. The Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) and its secretariat, UN Division for the Advancement of Women (UNDAW) monitor the implementation of measures for the advancement of women and review progress made at all levels, global, regional, sectoral and national. The UN Subcommission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities also addresses the violations of women's rights within several procedures. These include the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, which developed a Plan of Action for governments on child prostitution and child pornography and a Plan for the Prevention of the Traffic in Persons and the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others (Cook, 1997, p. 207). Finally, the implementation of ILO Conventions related to women's rights are supervised by the ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations. Also reports are provided by the specialized agencies of the UN on the implementation of CEDAW in areas falling within the scope of their activities.

As the evidence shows, a gender equality regime can be identified by its formal components: principles, norms, legal instruments and monitoring mechanisms. The next approach to regime identification questions whether formal components of a regime are sufficient to identify a regime and instead focuses on the behavior of states.

The Behavioral Approach: The Compliance of States

According to some regime analysts, the best way to identify regime is by examining the actual behavior of states. In other words, only state behavior demonstrates that particular injunctions are accepted in a given issue area, and that an international regime exists. As Mark Zacher observes:

Occurrences of major or long-term noncompliance, particularly involving participation of or support by major actors in the system, bring into question the efficacy of regime injunctions. We must doubt the effectiveness of behavioral guidelines if glaring violations are allowed to persist or if states tend to violate norms and rules on those few occasions when they would benefit from doing so.

(Zacher in Hansenclever et al, 1996, p. 181)

Does state behavior demonstrate that an international gender equality regime exists? 180 states have ratified CEDAW binding themselves to do nothing in contravention of its terms. Furthermore, in a landmark decision for women, the General Assembly, acting without a vote, adopted Optional Protocol to CEDAW on 6 October 1999, and called on all states to become party to the new instrument as soon as possible. By ratifying the Optional Protocol, a state recognizes the competence of the Committee on CEDAW to receive and consider complaints from individuals or groups within its jurisdiction. As of October 2004, 76 states have become signatories to the Optional Protocol.

What is the extent...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Series Editors' Preface
• List of Abbreviations
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1 The Emergence of a Global Women's Human Rights Regime and Turkey's Involvement
• 2 Gender Norms in Turkey: Construction and Contestation
• 3 Institutionalization of Women's Human Rights
• 4 Empowerment Through Training
• 5 Violence Against Women
• 6 Women's Participation in Local Governance
• Conclusions
• Bibliography
• Index