After eating our lunch, the Iraqese woman who is slated to give the Oral Statement for her NGO is still practising her speech and Marion and I help her with the pronunciation of the English words and we in general and mostly encourage her to believe in herself and trust that she will be fine speaking this afternoon. After a lovely restful/stressful lunchbreak outside on the terrace where the local fauna, a strutting arrogant male peacock that is stealing people’s food from their plates, we head out back to Room 5.
When I arrive in Room 5, I sit down behind one of the microphones for my statement later that afternoon and observe a rather heated conversation between Petra Snelders (VN Vrouwenverdrag Netwerk) and Daphna Hacker, the rapporteur on the Netherlands for CEDAW in the middle of the room. I walk over to see whether I can diffuse the tension. The debate centres on whether women (and men) ever really FREELY chose to be a sexworker. Daphna is convinced this is never the case. Petra tries to convince her that it is not that black and white, but is unsuccesful in this.
Therefore, I step in. Working with Quirine Lengkeek (FNV Mondiaal and SekswerkEpertise boardmember) and having met a fair number of sexworkers in the Netherlands over the last few years, I know for a fact that at least those that I met personally (women and men) are chosing this – in the Netherlands legal – profession freely. I tell Daphna about my encounters with sexworkers. About how I, like her, have worries about sexworkers and their freedoms and rights, but that I am convinced that quite a number of them are truly freely opting for this profession and that I believe that I have no right to judge someone else on life choices. No right at all. The only thing I want for everyone, whether sexworker, factory worker, tomato harverster, checkout employee, that they have all their legal rights fulfilled, that they are protected in their work-environment. That is what Vrouwenbelangen stands for: rights, full and protected, for ALL WOMEN, regardless of their chosen profession.
Daphna and us do have common ground in that she does agree with us that human trafficking and sexwork are not one and the same thing (https://sekswerkexpertise.nl/).
I have a short conversation with Daphna about the Dinah project of her legal colleage professor Dr. Ruth Halperin -Kaddari from the Bar Ilan University and how good it would be if that project would be in a side event at the CSW70 this year. The project is about getting real acknowledgement and real JUSTICE for women raped during war, whether in Congo, Bosnia, Ukraine or Israel, or anywhere else on planet Earth (https://thedinahproject.org/ Recognition and justice for victims of sexual violence in conflict).
Finally the moment of the Oral Statements has arrived. The sequence of countries given the floor to the NGO’s of those countries is the sequence of this weeks ‘constructive dialogues’ between de CEDAW Committee and their respective governments.
Vietnam on Tuesday, Lithuania on Wednesday, Iraq on Thursday, and the Netherlands on Friday.
The lady to the right of me is the first to speak on behalf of her NGO in Vietnam. We have met in the preparations for this week in the Zoom information meetings that IWRAW is organizing for all of us. Without these information meetings the stress would be higher for most of us as what the proceedings are during the week are very ‘un-known’ to those that have never been here. I intend to remedy that for future CEDAW consultations and dialogues by writing my how-to on the UN in Geneva, just like I have done this for the CSW in New York. The practicallities like where is the busstop at the center of town for bus20 that brings you to the Appia busstop right accross the entrance to the UN grounds; or what it means to particiapte in CEDAW proceedings should NOT be a cause of stress or uncertainty.
That is the least we can do for our fellow women activists around the world!
Finally, it is the turn of the NGO’s of the Netherlands.
The CEDAW Network NL is the first to speak. Stephanie Frifafa is giving the statement that Petra Snelders and Linda Mans have been working on. And then it is my turn.
This is what I say (and here is the link to the video of my statement):
https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1j/k1jabfkr1h
Statements of Dutch NGO’s start at 39 minutes and 2 seconds.
The below statement by Artemis Westenberg on behalf of the Platform Older Women starts at 41 minutes and 12 seconds.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thank you, Madam Chair, Committee Members
I am speaking today to this committee on behalf of the Platform Older Women on the subject of Age not being named in laws as a forbidden ground of discrimination. And I will speak on the pension-care-penalty.
Women in the Netherlands face discrimination, intersectional discrimination for over half of their lives due to Ageism. This stems from the fact that AGE as forbidden ground of discrimination is NOT explicitly named in our constitution and in our laws. It is only implied.
Women 50+, even 40+, live the reality that implied is not enough. If it were, then Ethnicity would not have to be named in our laws explicitly either. And we all know without this explicit mention Racism would be pervasive. Just as Ageism IS pervasive in Dutch policies and society right now.
We believe that adding ‘AGE’ to Article 1 of the Dutch Constitution is the first step in combatting this.
One of the fields where Older Women experience the bitter consequences of the lifelong discrimination of women is in their pension years.
Due to the systemic financial punishment women face during their entire lives through the pay gap, more care work and less generous pension plans in female dominated sectors – living to the average age of 85 and beyond is a very mixed blessing for many.
Regrettably, in the new Dutch pension system this pension-care-penalty will continue to negatively impact far more young women in their careers than men.
Consequently, this also leaves the Older Women of future generations at a higher risk of poverty during their retirement years.
We call upon the committee to question the Dutch government on Ageism as well as on the pension gap and the consequences for older women.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Petra compliments me right after my speech, which is nice of her.
And then we wait until Gulay Fitoz from the Migrant worker organization has given her statement, the recorded video of COC’s Freek Janssens is played and the statement of MAAT for Peace, a Cairo based organization, gives her video statement on human trafficking in the Netherlands. Petra and Linda react immediately to the numbers she is using in her recorded video, as they are apparently 15 years old. In response to this video statement a fact sheet will be presented to the CEDAW committee at the informal meeting during the lunchbreak on Thursday. Assistance on these matters being put into a factsheet has been called for from NGO experts in various organizations in the Netherlands.
Rapporteurs for each country pose their questions to the NGO’s of the 4 countries present.
In the video there is also the moment when the rapporteur for the Netherlands: Daphna Hacker asks the NGO’s in the Netherlands.
Video starts at 53 :14 about the New Emancipation White Paper (de emancipatie nota) that was presented to parliament for a vote on 10 June, 7 days after the cabinet became a caretake cabinet.
This Emancipation White Paper waters down the women’s emancipation goals of the Netherlands government substantially. Petra answers for us.
NOTE: the cabinet gave its mandate back to the king on 3rd of June. Which means, absolutely means, that NO NEW POLICIES can be introduced. The emancipation white paper is such a new policy. Which makes it constitutionally speaking (or legally, I am not totally sure which it is) ILLEGAL and VOID. Regrettably, we all know that a Resigned Cabinet (demissionair) ignores these laws as if they do not exist. As Mark Rutte stated some years ago, while in a Resigned Cabinet, “I cannot be sent home twice”.
Which statement is actually false: a Resigned Cabinet CAN be sent home again.
The other question for the Dutch NGO’s is from the Kazakhstan committee member E. Separov wants to know whether Dutch laws have working power in ALL of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, so also in the Dutch Caribbean Islands.
E. Sefarov video starts at 55:15 : has a question on the Caribbean parts of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Are the same laws applicable as in the European part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands?
Do the citizens of the Caribbean islands of the Kingdom have Dutch citizenship?
The answer to the question of Daphna Hacker by Petra Snelders of the NL CEDAW network video starts at 1:19:19
With the answer by Artemis Westenberg on the situation and applicable laws in the Caribbean islands of the kingdom of the Netherlands immediately following.
I look up the exact answer online and tell Petra I will handle this question when she will handle the question about the Emancipation White Paper. At 1:23:50 in the video
Artemis Westenberg: I proceed in giving a short lecture on the differences between the islands that are autonomous and that are like ‘municipalities’ not unlike Amsterdam. That everyone on those Islands (autonomous or municipality status) has the Dutch nationality.
That Foreign Affairs, Defence and Nationality are handled by the Kingdom for all of the kingdom.
That the autonomous islands make their own laws, but that there are still State Laws that hold true for all of the islands, and that regardless of status, ALL islands adhere to human rights standards.
Zie ook de posts van het Netwerk VN Vrouwenverdrag over de 92e sessie van het CEDAW Committee.
Zie ook de Schaduwrapportage Older Women in the Netherlands van het Platform Older Women.