Re: The Tulip Human Rights prize circus

We are writing to you regarding the controversy over the online voting for the Dutch Government’s Human Rights Tulip Prize. The use of an easily-manipulated internet voting process and the cynical social media campaigns of at least one of the candidates undermine the seriousness of human rights issues, and suggest that, perhaps, governments should not be involved in such contests and prizes.

Within Israel, the Tulip Prize became subject to public debate when an NGO nominee known as “B’Tselem” posted a Facebook message in Hebrew, encouraging its supporters to vote for “foreign funding to end the occupation.” Many Israelis, even those sympathetic to B’Tselem, understood that the post was an attempt by a narrow political group to antagonize opponents – making a mockery of the award and human rights activism.

In their online comments, many Israelis also noted the disparity and inequality between the various nominees, as exemplified by B’Tselem. Based in a democracy, there are no barriers to B’Tselem’s use of massive annual budgets to influence decision makers in government and media, and conduct mass social media campaigns. The €100,000 prize would be a fraction of its annual spending on political advocacy.

In sharp contrast, most of the other nominees from non-democratic regimes have meager resources and limited ability to mobilize social media. They lack B’Tselem’s international recognition. A €100,000 award would significantly improve their ability to operate as a human rights organization under repressive conditions.

NGO Monitor also notes that the two Israeli nominees, B’Tselem and a group known as “Adalah,” already receive significant funding from the Dutch government (B’Tselem: $710,000 in 2014-16 via the IHL Secretariat; Adalah: $190,000 in 2014-16 via the IHL Secretariat plus additional funds via Oxfam Novib). It is unclear why more Dutch funding is necessary or warranted.

The Dutch Parliament already launched an “Evaluation of Dutch Development Cooperation in the Palestinian Territories 2008-2014.” In this spirit of accountability, we would like to encourage the Dutch Foreign Ministry to review all mechanisms that provide funding to political advocacy NGOs, and consider how the Human Rights Tulip Prize may contribute to the subversion of the very principles that it is meant to champion.

We would very much appreciate your comments and response, and look forward to further opportunities to discuss human rights and NGO funding.

Sincerely,
Prof. Gerald M. Steinberg
President, the Amuta for NGO Responsibility
Jerusalem, Israel


 

October 28, 2015

Within Israel, the Tulip Prize became subject to public debate when an NGO nominee known as “B’Tselem” posted a Facebook message in Hebrew, encouraging its supporters to vote for “foreign funding to end the occupation.” Many Israelis, even those sympathetic to B’Tselem, understood that the post was an attempt by a narrow political group to antagonize opponents – making a mockery of the award and human rights activism.

NGO Monitor also notes that the two Israeli nominees, B’Tselem and a group known as “Adalah,” already receive significant funding from the Dutch government (B’Tselem: $710,000 in 2014-16 via the IHL Secretariat; Adalah: $190,000 in 2014-16 via the IHL Secretariat plus additional funds via Oxfam Novib). It is unclear why more Dutch funding is necessary or warranted.

Furthermore, It has come to our attention that one of the Tulip prize judges, Amira Yahyaoui, has made statements and tweeted messages against Israel that question her partiality as a Human rights judge, undermine the seriousness of prize, and suggest that, perhaps, the sincerity of the contest and prize are questionable.

The Dutch Parliament already launched an “Evaluation of Dutch Development Cooperation in the Palestinian Territories 2008-2014.” In this spirit of accountability, we would like to encourage the Dutch Foreign Ministry to review all mechanisms that provide funding to political advocacy NGOs, and consider how the Human Rights Tulip Prize may contribute to the subversion of the very principles that it is meant to champion.

We would very much appreciate your comments and response, and look forward to further opportunities to discuss human rights and NGO funding.

Sincerely,
Shaun Sacks
Europe Desk, NGO Monitor


 

November 10, 2015

Dear Mr Sacks,

Thank you for bringing the matter of Ms Yahyaoui’s tweets to our attention. Clearly we do not agree with some of these personal statements of Ms Yahyaoui. We have observed the jury process as a fair, balanced and impartial assessment of all candidates. Furthermore, the jury members represent different regions in the world and bring different forms of experience. The jury process is also only one step in selecting the winner of this year’s Human Rights Tulip. Our minister of foreign affairs will make the final decision.

Best regards,

Frank Huisingh
Policy officer for human rights defenders