Amnesty International at Davos

One of the key themes at the World Economic Forum has been the Middle East and there seems to be an opening to move forward on a political process. There is a note of optimism about a window of opportunity.

Everyone seemed to agree that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is “the central issue fuelling instability in the region”.

The World Economic Forum debate focused on the politics, but there is are human stories that also need to be told.

In December, when I visited Israel and the Occupied Territories, I saw for myself the terrible litany of human rights abuses and entrenched impunity. Despair about the foreseeable future is fuelling the radicalization of a predominantly young Palestinian population who see no prospects of a normal life.

The number of Palestinians killed has increased sharply in recent months, both as a result of deliberate and reckless shooting and shelling by Israeli forces and inter-factional killings, abductions and other abuse of human rights by Palestinians on Palestinians.

The economic situation in the Occupied Territories is dire, trapping an entire population in deep poverty. The cumulative impact of severe restrictions on the freedom of movement of Palestinians, the expansion of Israeli settlements and the building of the wall inside the Occupied Territories has strangled the local economy.

On the Israeli side too, there is fear of attacks by Palestinians and despair at the political stalemate.

There is an urgent need for all leaders of the international community to use their utmost influence to immediately end the killings and attacks on civilians and to agree on measures to build confidence and hope in the political process.

Here in Davos, the Israeli and Palestinian delegates seemed optimistic that the political process might move forward. That is a good sign for a region that has had little to look forward to for a long time.

But it will be meaningless if it fails to address the problems of insecurity, impunity and lawlessness, as well as the long-standing issues at the heart of the conflict.

Davos is a circus of the rich and powerful. Standing by the juice bar is Sneh, the Deputy Minister of Defence of Israel, and chief negotiator with the Palestinian Authority. He immediately recognises me from our meeting in Tel Aviv last December, and comes forward, introducing me to his companion as “the Head of Amnesty International who gives us a hard time but not always without reason.”

I see, just meters away, the former foreign minister of a Middle Eastern country, who commends me for AI’s campaign to Stop Violence against Women. “Why don’t you come to my country?” he says, “Come and talk about women’s issues – that’s a safe topic”.

Yesterday, just as the Prime Minister of Pakistan was leaving the podium after a session, I walked up to him and asked for a meeting. Shortly after, we were sitting together drinking cappuccino. From a distance, it would have looked a nice social encounter, but, in reality, it was hard talk about AI’s recent report on the way in which the Pakistani officials have succumbed to US pressure to secretly arrest and detain over hundreds of people, many of whom are still missing.

Politicians are used to talking about human rights with NGOs. For companies, it is much harder. I am invited to a closed meeting with a dozen CEOs of some of the world’s largest companies. The talk is tough on both sides, and frank. At the end of it, both sides recognise that business cannot ignore human rights problems. There is not only a moral case, but also a business case for human rights.

Business cannot be sustained without respect for human rights, both in the operations directly run by a company, as well as in the community in which the company operates. Some of the CEOs agree that we need to talk more about the dilemmas of operating in some of the poorest, conflict-ridden parts of the world. From other experiences like the Kimberly Process (for diamonds), I realise it’s going to be a long haul, but, in my business, I cannot give up.

The most memorable experience of the day, however, isn’t about the rich and powerful inside the Congress Hall. Walking back that evening after dinner, my colleague and I see about twenty young Swiss people blocking the traffic, with about as many police milling around them. Our Amnesty instincts take over and off we go to investigate any potential abuse of power! A young man comes up to me and asks me if I’m the Head of Amnesty International and can he photograph me with his friends (the Swiss police provide an interesting background), because he is a great admirer of what we in AI do.

The truth is that, while politicians and business leaders argue about the value of human rights, ordinary people know that human rights matter.

The World Economic Forum prides itself as a “multi-stakeholder forum”, the one place where government leaders, big business and civil society are supposed to rub shoulders. Its press release announcing the theme of this year’s Annual Meeting even listed some of the NGO heads present (including myself).

As a veteran of six WEF Annual Meetings, I wonder if NGO presence this year is more cosmetic than substantive.

A senior WEF executive yesterday admitted openly that they had cut down on NGO participation, allegedly because the corporate members do not feel NGO participation and concerns are relevant!

This is borne out by the programme where NGOs are largely lunch or dinner speakers. Yet, key panels are being organized on human rights, humanitarian assistance and climate change – issues at the heart of NGO concerns – but the only way we can raise our voice is from the floor (and that too, if we are lucky, as I was during a session on terrorism with high level politicians this morning).

When the voices of civil society organizations are shut out, some issues slip off the agenda – like gender (despite the World Economic Forum itself pioneering landmark initiatives like the Gender Gap Index).

By speaking truth to power – and usually without diplomatic finesse – we NGOs have probably made some business leaders uncomfortable, but if they think they can analyse and understand the world’s most pressing problems without the presence of a key constituency, then they are headed for trouble.

The 2007 Edelman Trust Barometer yet again pointed to high levels of trust in NGOs: NGOs are either the most credible institution or tied for the most credible institution in 10 of the 18 countries surveyed.

By limiting dialogue between business and NGOs, is the World Economic Forum doing a disservice to its important corporate clients?