SAM organization for Rights and Liberties issued an evaluative study on the role of influential parties, institutions, and countries in the human rights situation in Yemen during the nine-year conflict period, with the participation of 101 respondents (77.2% male, 22.8% female) from media professionals and human rights activists from various media institutions, human rights organizations, and political and social entities operating in the country.
Assessing the role of human rights organizations in Yemen
The results of the study showed that (68.3%) of the respondents rated the performance of human rights organizations in exposing and monitoring human rights violations in Yemen as good, while (16.7%) of them rated the performance as very good. On the other hand, (14%) of the respondents assessed the performance as poor.
The statistical results of the study also showed that the majority of respondents, at (45.5%), reported the negative role played by the UN envoy in limiting the continued violation of human rights in Yemen, while (27.7%) of them rated the role as neutral (neither positive nor negative), and (16.8%) said that the UN envoy does not play any role in limiting the continued violations. Additionally, (64.3%) stated that the role of the US envoy in limiting the continued violation of human rights in Yemen is negative, while only (4%) of the study sample considered the US envoy's role to be positive.
According to the study results, the majority of the surveyed media professionals and human rights advocates (51.5%) have a moderate level of trust in the reports issued by the Group of Eminent Experts on Yemen, the UN body tasked with investigating human rights violations in Yemen. Meanwhile, (25.7%) of them have a low level of trust, and only (20%) have a high level of trust in these reports.
Respondents' impression of international organizations operating in Yemen
The study results reveal that the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Food Programme (WFP) were ranked highest in terms of the level of impression among media professionals and human rights activists in Yemen, with relative importance (significance) of 69.4% and 67.8% respectively, representing a moderate degree of agreement compared to other organizations operating in Yemen.
This was followed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the International Organization for Migration (IOM), and the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), with relative importance of 64.6%, 64%, 63.6%, and 63% respectively.
The lowest ranked were the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the offices of the UN and US envoys in Yemen, with relative importance of 52.6% and 52% respectively.
The work of the United Nations in Yemen
Based on the study results, the respondents described the role of the United Nations in Yemen as generally low across various domains - political, humanitarian, economic, social, and human rights.
However, the study findings indicated that the UN's work to improve the situation of children and refugees in Yemen was ranked highest in terms of the degree of response, impression, and evaluation by the study sample regarding international organizations operating in Yemen, with a relative importance of 69% and 67% respectively.
This was followed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the International Organization for Migration (IOM), and the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), with relative importance of 64.6%, 64%, 63.6%, and 63% respectively.
The lowest ranked were the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the office of the UN envoy, and the office of the US envoy in Yemen, with relative importance of 52.6% and 52%.
Trust in the parties affecting the reality of human rights in Yemen
Based on the study, from the perspective of the journalists, political activists, and human rights advocates participating in the survey, the level of trust in the role of influential parties, institutions, and countries in the human rights situation in Yemen was 52.4%, which is a low level of response, indicating a weak and low level of trust among the study sample in these parties.
The study found that civil society organizations/non-governmental organizations ranked first in terms of the level of trust of the study community, with a relative importance of 69% and a moderate degree of agreement. This was followed by human rights organizations and the National Human Rights Commission, with a relative importance of 66% and 65.2% respectively.
In the third rank came political parties, tribal groups, and the Ministry of Human Rights, where the trust of the study community was low and weak, with a percentage of 46.4%, 47.2%, and 49.6% respectively.
The lowest in the trust of the study sample was the UN envoy, the US envoy, the local council, and the government, with a relative importance of 36%, 41.6%, 44.2%, and 45.2% respectively, representing a very weak and low level of trust compared to the other parties and institutions.
The role of external states in protecting human rights in Yemen
Based on the study results, the Netherlands, the European Union, and China ranked first, second, and third respectively in terms of the external role in protecting human rights in Yemen, with a relative importance of 55%, 52.6%, and 52% respectively. This represents a moderate level of agreement, indicating that the role of these parties is of moderate importance, but is still the best compared to the other external countries working on the issue of human rights protection in Yemen.
Following them were Germany and Canada, with a relative importance of 48.8% and 47.8% respectively. In the last rank were the United Kingdom, France, and the United States in terms of the degree of response and agreement, which was very low, with a relative importance of 41.4%, 41.4%, and 41.8% respectively.
Human rights obligations of parties to conflict
Based on the study results, the respondents considered the role of the Yemeni parties involved in the conflict regarding their commitment to human rights in Yemen to be negative, with a low rate of agreement at 48% overall.
The study findings showed that the local authority in Marib and the local authority in Taiz respectively ranked first in terms of their commitment to human rights during the war and conflict in Yemen, with a relative importance of 64.2% and 61%. This represents a moderate level of agreement, indicating that these two authorities have the best commitment to human rights during the ongoing conflict in Yemen compared to the other parties.
This was followed by the Presidential Council (the internationally recognized government) in terms of its commitment to human rights in the ongoing conflict in Yemen, with a relative importance of 56.8%, representing a moderate level of response. Meanwhile, the National Resistance on the western coast ranked third, with a relative importance of 46.4%, representing a weak level of response regarding the National Resistance's commitment to human rights compared to the other parties and institutions.
The last rank went to the Ansar Allah group ("the Houthis") and the Southern Transitional Council, with a very low degree of response and agreement, with a relative importance of 28.4% and 33.4% respectively, representing a very weak and low level of their commitment to human rights in the ongoing joint conflict in Yemen, compared to the other parties.
The Arab coalition's contribution to the deterioration of human rights in Yemen
Based on the study results, it is clear that the United Arab Emirates came first in terms of its contribution to the deterioration of human rights and its perpetration of numerous violations during the conflict and war in Yemen, with a relative importance of 89%, representing a very high percentage. Meanwhile, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia came second with an agreement rate of 76%, which also represents a high percentage.