Pacific Lagging On Women's Political Participation, Says UN Official
There is a long road ahead on women's issues in the Pacific Islands, but at least discussions are beginning to take place at high levels.
That is the opinion of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Pacific head Heike Alefsen.
The office recently celebrated 20 years since its establishment in Fiji's capital Suva in 2005, playing the role of advisor to island nations on human rights issues.
Alefsen told RNZ Pacific that the region seems to stick out in terms of lack of political participation by women.
'We have countries that have zero [women] parliamentarians and [no women] in cabinet,' she said.
'Two countries that have some reserved seats in parliament and a few women in cabinet, but overall the percentage is really very low compared to most other regions of the world.'
In Fiji, Alefsen noted that their number of female MPs has halved, from 10 to 5, since 2020.
'As we have seen in recent elections, the numbers can drop very quickly.'
Her office is advising nation states that they should be working towards 50/50 gender parity in their governing bodies, in accordance with recommendations from the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).
For Fiji, as discussions about temporary special measures to boost female representation in parliament take place, Alefsen said they should be taken seriously.
'They are there to rectify entrenched longstanding discrimination and under-representation of women.
'They are not there as handouts, or to get women in that are tokenistic.'
Measures could include reserving seats, either at the parliament level or within individual political parties, Alefsen said.
'It is a discussion that will need to overcome a lot of entrenched stereotypes, as to the roles of women and men in political spheres, and also what the obstacles are.'
'This would come at a time when violence against women and girls, throughout the whole Pacific region, remains a significant problem.
'About two-thirds on average of all women in the Pacific, including Fiji, experience violence,' she added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
6 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Luxon defends voting changes
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon. The Prime Minister says the public still have plenty of time to get enrolled to vote despite scrapping same-day enrolment for elections. Last week the government announced legislation to overhaul electoral laws it said had become "unsustainable". The government agreed to close enrolment before advance voting begins, with people needing to enrol or update their details by midnight on the Sunday before advance voting starts on the Monday morning (in other words, 13 days before election day). The legislation sets a requirement of 12 days advance voting at each election, and the changes would mean special vote processing could get underway sooner. On Monday morning, Newsroom reported Attorney-General Judith Collins, had said the proposed law changes clashed with constitutional rights in a report. She indicated 100,000 or more people could be directly or indirectly disenfranchised by rules banning enrolment in the final 13 days before an election. Collins declined an interview with RNZ on the issue. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said Collins had a statutory responsibility to review legislation to make sure it was consistent with the bill of rights. "As a government we think enrolment should happen before early voting starts," he said. Luxon pointed to Australia as an example of a country that does not allow enrolment on the same day as voting. "We want everyone to participate but it's just done two weeks before elections day. It's not uncommon, it gives people plenty of time to get enrolled and get sorted. "All we're saying is we want everybody to participate in our democracy... not an unreasonable request." On Election Day 2023 110,000 people enrolled to vote or updated their details.
RNZ News
6 hours ago
- RNZ News
Immigration Minister on overseas born NZers moving to Australia
immigration 13 minutes ago Last week, RNZ reported nearly half of the New Zealanders applying for Australian citizenship weren't born here. Minister of Immigration Erica Stanford spoke to Ingrid Hipkiss.
Newsroom
a day ago
- Newsroom
Why NZ must resist the trashing of international law
Opinion: Last week, the foreign ministries of 30 countries, including New Zealand, belatedly issued a joint statement that acknowledged the 'suffering of civilians in Gaza has reached new depths', demanded 'an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire', and warned Netanyahu's government of 'further action' if this was not achieved. However, this statement highlights something even bigger than the escalation of an Israeli-Palestinian conflict which, since the Hamas terror attack of October 7, 2023, has led to the death of more than 61,000 people – around 59,500 Palestinians and 1710 Israelis – and cost the lives of hundreds of journalists, academics and humanitarian aid workers. The humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza is a symptom of the post-9/11 erosion of an international rules-based order, enshrined in institutions like the United Nations and norms like multilateralism. The US' illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003, China's assertiveness in the South China Sea, Putin's annexation of Crimea and subsequent full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 as well as recent US trade protectionism are examples of an increasing trend that has weakened the importance of rules in global politics. During this period, the United Nations Security Council, the organ with formal responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, has repeatedly been paralysed by the veto powers of its five permanent members. The biggest offenders in this regard have been Russia, the US and China, three states imbued with a strong sense of national exceptionalism, that have not hesitated to cast a veto or act unilaterally to protect their perceived national concerns even if it undermines international law. It should be emphasised that most states including relatively small players like New Zealand and middle powers like Australia are dependent on an international-rules based order for their prosperity and security. While rules are often seen as an encumbrance by great powers, they are viewed by most small and middle powers as essential in order to conduct their international activities in a relatively safe, equitable and predictable fashion. Nevertheless some observers believe that smaller states like New Zealand are powerless to prevent the slide towards the 'law of the jungle' in the international arena. According to the so-called realist perspective, great powers do what great powers do and 'little' New Zealand has no choice but to quietly accept blatant violations of international law when they are committed by powerful traditional friends like the US or its close allies such as Israel. However, such a perspective exaggerates the role of great powers in the interconnected world of the 21st century. We should recall the founders of the UN in 1945 conferred the right of veto on five great powers of that time to ensure they remained in the organisation and helped solve the world's problems. This logic explains why the Labour New Zealand government, led by Prime Minister Peter Fraser, was prepared to reluctantly concede the necessity of the veto mechanism in the Security Council when the UN was established. Fast forward 80 years. In 2025, it is clear that superpowers such as the US or China cannot run the world – even if they want to – simply because key challenges such as climate change, pandemics, transnational terrorism and financial contagion do not respect borders and are simply too big to be resolved unilaterally or with the assistance of a few allies. This means, despite intensified geopolitical rivalries, small states and middle powers are not doomed to be fast followers and can, if they choose to act strategically in a multilateral fashion, exert some agency and influence on international issues where there is a void in great-power leadership. The precedent of the Christchurch Call in 2020, when New Zealand collaborated with France in a bid to curb online extremism which won the support of more than 55 states, including Biden's America, points to the potential for bottom-up multilateral initiatives in the contemporary era. Confronted with the steady decline of international rules in trade and security matters, smaller powers cannot rely on veto-wielding states in the UN Security Council to reverse this damaging trend. But the New Zealand government does have the option of reaching out to other members of the UN to build international support for a diplomatic initiative to reinvigorate the idea of an international rules-based order. This vision would involve reforming the Security Council to make it a more reliable barrier to war by curtailing the use of the veto by the permanent five states or at least pressing for a new arrangement whereby General Assembly resolutions with more than two-thirds' support become binding and not subject to a veto. Without curbing the use of the veto in the Security Council or significantly increasing the power of the UN General Assembly, certain states will continue to believe they are 'above the law' and the prospect of more barbaric conflicts like Gaza will remain an ever-present possibility in our world.
