The United States has imposed sanctions against Francesca Albanese, the UN’s special rapporteur in the Palestinian territories, marking an unprecedented situation that has raised eyebrows globally.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio cited Albanese’s direct engagement with the International Criminal Court (ICC) as a key reason for the sanctions. Rubio claims that her actions are intended to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute nationals of both the United States and Israel.
The sanctions were framed as necessary measures to prevent what the US described as ‘illegitimate ICC overreach and abuse of power.’ This move aligns with actions taken under President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14203, which aims to impose sanctions on the ICC.
This situation raises significant questions about the role of special rapporteurs and why Albanese’s performance has elicited such a strong response from the US government.
Special rapporteurs are independent human rights experts who are part of the UN Human Rights Council’s special procedures system established in 1979. Currently, there are 46 thematic mandates on issues such as extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, as well as 14 country mandates, including the one concerning Palestine.
These experts, appointed based on their credentials in academia, advocacy, law, and other relevant fields, have a variety of responsibilities. These tasks include country visits, sending communications to states about specific human rights violations, developing international human rights standards, and engaging in advocacy efforts.
The UN first established institutional provisions for independent experts on human rights in 1967. This was partly in response to the situation in South Africa, with the appointment of a working group of experts focused on apartheid and racial discrimination in southern Africa.
By 1968, the group was tasked with investigating ‘Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories,’ a mandate that exists to this day.
Historically, neither South Africa nor Israel allowed UN experts into their territories to assess their human rights records. However, in 2003, South Africa, nearly a decade after conducting its first democratic elections, issued a standing invitation to all thematic special procedures, signifying a theoretical commitment to engage with UN rapporteurs.
As for Francesca Albanese, who specializes in international human rights law, she is the eighth rapporteur to hold this position since its creation in 1993. Appointed in 2022 for a three-year term, her mandate was recently extended for another three years.
The controversial sanctions imposed by the US were reportedly triggered by Albanese’s latest report released on June 30, which focused on the role of the corporate sector in ‘colonial endeavours and associated genocides.’ In that report, she identified over 60 companies as ‘complicit.’
In the wake of the US sanctions, various institutions and prominent human rights figures have rallied to Albanese’s defense. Agnes Callamard, the current Secretary General of Amnesty International and a former special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings, highlighted the ‘chilling effects for all special rapporteurs’ stemming from the US decision.
Additionally, leading UN human rights officials condemned the sanctions, warning that they set a dangerous precedent that needs to be reversed.
In a further international escalation, the Israeli government declared Albanese persona non grata in February 2024 after she made a statement regarding victims of a tragic incident on October 7, asserting that they were not murdered because of their Jewish identity, but rather in response to Israeli oppression.
Responding to this declaration, Albanese asserted that it was a distraction from the larger issues at hand and encouraged the world’s focus to remain on Gaza amid ongoing conflicts.
Special rapporteurs enjoy a level of diplomatic immunity, designed to facilitate their ability to express critical opinions and conduct investigations without fear of reprisals. However, incidents in the past have illustrated that this status can sometimes be jeopardized, as evidenced by interventions from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1989 and 1999.
In both cases, the ICJ had to clarify the extent of diplomatic immunity for special rapporteurs when home countries of two rapporteurs impeded their freedom of speech. This illustrated the precarious position that rapporteurs can occupy, navigating the complex dynamics between the UN and state representatives.
The issues surrounding Albanese’s sanctions intertwine with a broader funding crisis underway at the UN. The Trump administration, among others including countries like China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, is reportedly withholding significant funds, nearing US$1.5 billion, which poses severe challenges for UN human rights and humanitarian aid programs.
As with past examples of individuals facing attacks on their integrity, solidarity among all special rapporteurs appears crucial to defend the integrity of the entire system. Amid these developments, despite the challenges assaulting her integrity and person, Albanese has reaffirmed her belief in the effectiveness of human rights law instruments.
Speaking during a public talk at SOAS University of London in November 2024, she pointed out that the full potential of these instruments remains to be unlocked, emphasizing that this can only be achieved through collective efforts.
image source from：theconversation
