Ensuring Responsible Publication, Free from Exploitation in a Senseless and Malicious Context!
Abd Al-Rashid Al-Faqih
At all levels and in various forms, dealing with human rights victims and issues—both institutionally and individually—requires a high degree of sensitivity. This sensitivity must adhere to strict professional and ethical standards, leaving no room for improvisation, whims, or recklessness. It must be founded on principles such as no-harm, the best interest of the victim, accuracy, objectivity, and responsibility. Without these principles and conditions, any interaction by human rights organizations, media outlets, or activists on social media networks cannot achieve the desired positive impact for any victim, issue, or value.
In interactions involving human rights and humanitarian issues, particularly those concerning women, children, and vulnerable groups, failing to adhere to these principles and conditions does not merely result in the absence of the desired positive impact. It can also inflict severe harm on the victims, adding further layers of suffering that are as detrimental as the original violations they faced.
In all human rights and humanitarian cases, there exists a long series of appropriate actions and interventions designed to benefit the victims and address the issues. Publication and dissemination of information are not always essential components of this process, nor should they necessarily be prioritized. Instead, publishing may serve as one part of a well-considered advocacy plan, following effective and deliberate steps tailored to each specific case, victim, and circumstance. This sequence of actions should be based on impartial and responsible assessment, supported by the informed consent of the victims, to ensure their best interests are served.
When there are multiple and conflicting assessments between the victim and other engaged entities or individuals, it is crucial to recognize and adhere to the principle that the victim's assessment and choices on how to handle their case must be respected and implemented. Any form of coercion, deception, or fraud is prohibited, even if it is claimed to be in the victim's best interest through alternative assessments.
Noble and sincere intentions, no matter how deep, strong, pure, or earnest, are not sufficient to exempt one from responsibility for the impact of every interaction and engagement, whether individual or institutional, with human rights and humanitarian issues. Every interaction, regardless of how secondary, reactive, or subsequent it may seem, becomes an independent and significant action with either positive or negative consequences. This necessitates that anyone involved in such interactions be insightful, knowledgeable, aware, and vigilant to ensure their engagement is responsible and constructive, rather than mindlessly exploited in a senseless or malicious context for the benefit of an individual, entity, or otherwise.
Before interacting with any issue or story, it is essential to consider and answer the following questions:
Is the published content for discussion based on the informed consent of the stakeholder/victim/family, according to a precise and impartial assessment?
How accurate, objective, and comprehensive are the information and descriptions presented for discussion and interaction?
Are these information and descriptions derived from genuine and relevant sources related to the story?
Does the interaction contribute to the victim's best interest without causing additional harm?
Is this interaction I am about to engage in the correct one in terms of its place in the sequence of necessary steps for addressing a human rights or humanitarian issue? Additionally, is its timing, location, form, and suitability appropriate for the nature of the issue, the victim, and their best interests?
Are there any missing or overlooked dimensions of the issue under discussion?
In conclusion, from this very small yet crucial test, and like many other small and large assessments, it can be confidently asserted that unless new performances emerge in every aspect and domain, founded upon new principles and standards vastly different from the usual inadequate performances in our societies, criticizing existing structures, entities, and individuals amounts to empty rhetoric devoid of value, meaning, or impact.
