Members of Plataforma EPU
Cases- Location of case in SG report
- 2015-021-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2015
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 15.199999
Longitude: -86.241905
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Honduras
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- Dates of prior UN action
- 5 May 2015
- Type of record
- Named organization
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Individual's/organization's activity
a network of 51 civil society organizations
- Type of rights defended
- Unclear in SG Report
- Was the victim a civil servant, member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
for their engagement with the universal periodic review process of Honduras prior to its review on 8 May 2015 (A/HRC/30/27, case HND 1/2015)
- Engagement with UN body
- UN Human Rights Council: UPR
- Dates of engagement
- prior to 8 May 2015
- Type of attempted engagement
- Submission of information to UN
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- 6-7 April 2015; 9 April 2015; 10 April 2015; 13 April 2015
- Reprisal information
On 6 and 7 April 2015, government officials reportedly publicly warned the national and international community of a smear campaign initiated by certain non-governmental organizations meant to taint the image of the country in the context of its review. On 9 April, the National Commissioner for Human Rights reportedly warned that certain groups might use events to pursue their own interests, referring specifically to the information submitted by non- governmental organizations for the review of Honduras. The media allegedly repeated these stigmatizing declarations for several days, including on 10 April, when they alleged that certain groups intended to sabotage the review of Honduras. On 13 April, in a public statement, a parliamentarian reportedly implied that these organizations received payments for discrediting the country (ibid.)
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Defamation / Defamation campaign
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- Both state and non-state actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- No
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- No
- Further case development
At the moment of finalization of the present report, no response had been received from the Government.
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- No
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 0