The new UK government must step up in the fight to protect front line defenders

Yesterday, Global Witness revealed that at least 196 land and environmental defenders were murdered in 2023.

Countless others were imprisoned, threatened and disappeared. They include Indigenous leaders fighting deforestation in the Amazon, student activists protesting for stronger climate regulation, and campaigners calling for polluters to be held accountable.

This fits into a global trend of repression, with some paying the ultimate price. Front Line Defenders reported 1,538 violations against human rights defenders in 105 countries last year, including arbitrary arrests, death threats and surveillance, as well as physical attacks. Around the world, workers and their unions face an all-time high number of assaults on their fundamental rights, according to the ITUC. At Peace Brigades International (PBI) we are receiving more requests to protect land and environmental defenders than ever.

Beyond the human tragedy, these tendencies should trouble any of us working to eradicate poverty, injustice and abuses. Throughout history, human rights defenders have been the catalysts for change in their communities, their countries, and globally. If their voices are silenced and their lives threatened, then the entire progressive movement is hamstrung.

A 2019 Foreign Office policy committed UK Support for Human Rights Defenders, but implementation has been patchy. Many diplomats don’t even know it exists and, while the UK has provided life-saving interventions in some contexts, other activists have been left in the cold. The Conservatives promised various strategies which could have situated the defenders policy in a more holistic approach. None of them – including the latest iteration, a Strategy on Open Societies and Human Rights, promised in the International Development White Paper – ever saw the light of day.

Keir Starmer and David Lammy need to change this – heeding the call from fifty civil society organisations to make support, protection and engagement of global civil society a central pillar of a more impactful and cost-effective foreign policy.

Labour have pledged to “end the climate chaos”, “defend the UK’s security” and “modernise international development”. Success in these endeavours will require the government to embrace human rights defenders as crucial partners, and equip them to act as such.

But what does this mean? For defenders themselves, as evidenced by Amnesty International in 2021, it means the UK implementing effective diplomatic strategies to recognise and protect activists. It means transforming the nature and scale of funding for civil society to be sustainable and flexible. And it means developing protection mechanisms, respite schemes and rapid response support for those facing the gravest threats.

These interventions require a different way of working, rather than many additional funds. Indeed, the government could adapt the numerous impactful strategies which represent value for money in other countries. Fundamentally, Labour need to signal that they will engage grassroots organisations and human rights defenders as legitimate partners for change rather than as mere recipients of aid or sources of information.

Women’s rights champions are an obvious example. They have successfully campaigned for legislation countering gender-based violence in dozens of countries across every continent, yet Front Line Defenders list them as one of the most attacked groups of activists. The UK should be funding them and engaging them as experts.

From Ukraine to Iran, journalists and human rights groups have played a crucial role in ensuring access to information and consistently stand up to promote democracy and the rule of law. These brave individuals and organisations defend the rights of entire populations. Investing in them and harnessing their knowledge would be one of the most cost-effective ways for the new government to scale up impact across its foreign policy priorities.

This includes its climate objectives. Indigenous peoples preserve 80 per cent of the planet’s remaining biodiversity, yet the Global Witness report shows that Indigenous groups are under-represented in climate talks and suffer disproportionate levels of violent reprisals. The UK should be advocating for their inclusion and their protection.

The government will also need to act to tackle the root causes of risk facing land and environmental defenders – by ensuring effective regulation and accountability for the businesses which are increasingly involved in attacks. NGOs and trade unions, brand name companies, investors worth trillions, and four out of five Britons believe the government should make it mandatory for businesses to carry out environmental and human rights due diligence along their supply chains. The EU legislated on this issue last year, leaving the UK at risk of being left behind.

Last month, David Lammy appointed Minouche Shafik to conduct a review of the government’s approach to international development. There are three existing commitments which she should recommend that Labour pick up and prioritise.

1. The government should update the 2019 policy on UK Support for Human Rights Defenders, engaging front-line activists on its content and how to ensure its effective implementation globally.
2. They should make good on the last government’s promise of a Strategy on Open Societies and Human Rights, ensuring it includes flexible funding mechanisms so that spending supports civil society as efficiently and effectively as possible.
3. The government should open a consultation with stakeholders, including civil society organisations, on how to implement Labour’s own National Policy Forum pledge to examine the best way to prevent environmental harms and human rights abuses in supply chains.

Labour’s manifesto promised to “reconnect” Britain as “a reliable partner, a dependable ally, and a good neighbour”. By applying this commitment to civil society, the government will improve both the UK’s standing internationally and their own chances of meeting their foreign policy goals.