Podcasts about human rights initiative

In this episode of Tiny Pulpit Talks, Rev. T. J. FitzGerald welcomes Bill Holston, Chief Executive Officer of Dallas Eviction Advocacy Center, to talk about his organization's mission to serve tenants facing housing insecurity with pro bono legal advice and representation, housing assistance, rent relief and a clearinghouse of tenant and eviction information. DEAC assists all Dallas County tenants regardless of income, race, immigration status, or native language. Text DEAC for help: 469.436.2704 Learn more about DEAC: Give to DEAC: 00:00 - Rev. T. J. Fitzgerald welcomes Bill Holston, Chief Executive Officer of Dallas Eviction Advocacy Center 01:20 - Bill Holston's background as a criminal defense lawyer and executive director of the Human Rights Initiative. 02:27 - Facing an eviction? Text 469.436.2704 03:14 - How the DEAC finds clients 04:36 - Can you defend yourself against eviction without a lawyer? 07:41 - "Housing is a human right." 09:39 - Housing insecurity in Dallas, TX 13:03 - "Working for justice is a fundamental spiritual practice."   Tiny Pulpit Talks is a podcast series from First Unitarian Church of Dallas that takes a behind-the-scenes look at ministry from a Unitarian Universalist perspective. This is a rare opportunity to see what goes into crafting meaningful and inspirational sermons, learn how worship comes together each Sunday, and explore the many facets of spiritual leadership. Subscribe to get updates about new episodes here on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

Today's episode of The Aid Market podcast features Michael as the host, joined by Shannon Green, a senior advisor to the administrator for the USAID's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance, and Barbara Smith, who manages democracy, human rights, conflict resolution, and rule of law programs at the Carter Center.    In this episode, they delve into prominent issues and explore the actions taken in response. Additionally, they discuss the current administration's priorities, election integrity, AI's role, and localization efforts and retrospectively examine our past and present progress.   IN THIS EPISODE: [00:00] Mike begins by sharing who is on today's podcast and an update from Dean Fritz Meyer of the Denver Democracy Summit [09:06] Shannon discusses what her role is at the USAID's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Governance and what is happening there [19:28] Barbara shares how this administration is currently prioritizing this work that Shannon shared and compares where we were to where we are [26:15] Discussion of USAID Forward and localization and the role AI plays [38:38] Discussion of the National Security Council [44:08] Question from a partner regarding Save the Children and the Global Fragility Act [46:47] Question from a listener on how the DRG is promoted versus what is done on counter-authoritarianism [50:41] Questions from two listeners regarding traditional humanitarian and USAID priorities [55:12] Barbara and Shannon leave the listeners with important thoughts    KEY TAKEAWAYS:  People from all over the world hunger for freedom. The USAID is harnessing its development assistance to promote accountable states, active citizens and rights-respecting societies. Brazen attempts at stealing elections are a problem in Africa.    RESOURCES:   Shannon Green - USAID website Barbara Smith - Carter Center Website Fritz Mayer LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/frederick-mayer-11862b3b   ABOUT THE GUESTS:   Shannon N. Green :Assistant to the Administrator Shannon N. Green serves as the Assistant to the Administrator of the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance (DRG). In this role, she leads USAID's efforts to invigorate democracy, enhance human rights and justice, and bolster governance that advances the public interest and delivers inclusive development. Previously, Ms. Green was the Senior Advisor to the Administrator and Executive Director of the Anti-Corruption Task Force where she led USAID's historic elevation of anti-corruption and aligned the Agency's policies, programming, and resources to counter corruption at a global scale. Before returning to public service in 2021, Ms. Green was the Senior Director of Programs at the Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC) and Director and Senior Fellow of the Human Rights Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), where her research focused on addressing threats to democratic institutions and norms, enhancing justice and accountability, and improving security forces' respect for human rights. From 2004 - 2015, Ms. Green held a number of positions in the U.S. Government, including as the Senior Director for Global Engagement on the National Security Council. In that role, she spearheaded efforts to deepen and broaden U.S. engagement with critical populations overseas, including the President's Stand with Civil Society Agenda and young leader initiatives around the world. Prior to that, Ms. Green served in the DRG Center, where she developed policies, strategies, and programs to advance political reform and human rights in the Middle East and North Africa. Ms. Green received her B.A. in Political Science and History from the University of Georgia and her M.A. in International Peace and Conflict Resolution from American University, and has served as an adjunct professor for Syracuse University Maxwell School.   Fritz Mayer Dean of Josef Korbel School of International Studies Frederick ‘Fritz' Mayer, Ph.D., is the dean of the Josef Korbel School of International Studies at the University of Denver. Dean Mayer's research interests include international trade and economic globalization and the role of storytelling in politics and collective action. He has published two single-author books, four educational publications, and numerous articles and chapters. He is affiliated with the American Political Science Association, the International Studies Association, and the Association of Public Policy and Management. Prior to DU, Dean Mayer served as professor of public policy, political science and environment; associate dean; director of the Center for Political Leadership, Innovation and Service; and director of the Program on Global Policy and Governance at the Terry Sandford School of Public Policy at Duke University. Barbara Smith, M.S. Vice President, Peace Programs Barbara Smith oversees the Carter Center's democracy, human rights, conflict resolution, and rule of law programs, which operate projects and observe elections in countries across the globe. Before coming to The Carter Center in September 2020, Smith was principal and founder of the international development consulting firm Mountain Time Development. She also was a senior associate at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, focused on the Human Rights Initiative, conducting field work and research on civil society. Her wide-ranging career also includes assignments at the United States Agency for International Development and with the National Security Council in the White House. At USAID, Smith held a number of positions, most recently as deputy assistant to the administrator in the Bureau of Policy, Planning, and Learning. She also co-led the team that created the seminal USAID 2013 Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance Strategy, which is applied across the approximately 100 countries where USAID works. Other positions she held at USAID included senior policy analyst, deputy coordinator for Middle East Transition Response during the Arab Spring, and senior field advisor for democracy and governance. Smith served on the National Security Council as a director for Afghanistan and Pakistan affairs and as senior director for governance and law at the Asia Foundation. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, she was a spokesperson for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. In Afghanistan, she was assistant country representative for the Asia Foundation, where she also directed the foundation's efforts to assist Afghanistan in holding its first post-Taliban elections. Smith earned a bachelor's degree in government from the University of Texas and a master's degree in political science from Texas State University.

This episode features Dr. Suzanne Barakat, a family physician and executive director of the Health and Human Rights Initiative at the University of California, San Francisco. Dr. Barakat shares her experiences and expertise in working with refugees, asylum seekers, and stateless persons, shedding light on the terminology, history, and challenges these marginalized communities face. She emphasizes the importance of storytelling to create empathy and change, discussing the emotional toll on storytellers and encouraging listeners to reflect on their own perceptions. The episode also addresses actionable steps that individuals can take to support refugees and marginalized communities.Watch the White Helmet documentary on Netflix Listen to the Reveal podcast to dive deeper Support the Health and Human Rights Initiative and Society of Refugee Healthcare ProvidersGet trained Asylum Medicine Training Initiative, or AMTI, trains clinicians how to do forensic medical evaluations.

Since the start of the Green Wave movement, multiple countries across Latin America have liberalized their abortion laws. Ivonne Garza, Senior Associate at the O'Neill Institute for National Global Health Law at Georgetown University Law Center and Natialia Acevedo Guerrero, Senior Consultant with the Health and Human Rights Initiative at the O'Neill Institute, sit down to talk with us about recent court cases in Colombia and Mexico and how they have expanded access to abortion care across the region.   The Green Wave, a liberal feminist movement which started in Argentina, increased mobilization in 2020 to decriminalize and destigmatize abortion across multiple countries in Latin America. This social movement paved the way for leaders to take abortion considerations to the top courts and set the groundwork for judicial and legislative change.   In September 2021, three court cases changed the legal framework for abortion in the Federation of Mexico. The first case addressed the constitutionality of abortion regulations on states' criminal codes and recognized the right to choose “without exception,” which includes abortion, sex education, family planning decision making, and more. The second case ruled that states were not allowed to regulate protections to the right to life that go beyond what the Mexican Constitution currently outlines. Lastly, the third case analyzed “conscientious objection” in the healthcare system and ruled it an individual right of medical personnel, but also that it could be limited to protect other fundamental rights.  In 2006, Colombia's court referred to abortion in a favorable way. In this year, abortion was decriminalized in moments of when the pregnant person's health and life at risk, pregnancy as a result of rape and incest, and when the fetus is incompatible with life. In 2022, the Colombian Court studied a new lawsuit that asked for the complete decriminalization of abortion in the country. Through four arguments, including 1) the proportionality of abortion criminalization; 2) the freedom and conscious of women and reproductive decisions; 3) the criminalization of abortion and the right to equality; and 4) the preventative purpose of criminal law, the Court concluded that the criminalization of abortion was in tension with the country's affirmed right to health and reproductive rights. Both countries provide an opportunity for U.S. advocates to learn. By studying the history of Mexican and Colombian Court decisions, U.S. leaders can take away elements related to discrimination, equality, intersectional approaches, and legal frameworks that may be helpful for the fight for abortion rights at home.  LinksO'Neill Institute on Twitter O'Neill Institute on Facebook The Green Wave: How Abortion Rights Are Spreading Through Latin AmericaSupport the showFollow Us on Social: Twitter: @rePROsFightBack Instagram: @reprosfbFacebook: rePROs Fight Back Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.comRate and Review on Apple PodcastThanks for listening & keep fighting back!

What's better than coordinating a two-day virtual conference on pressing challenges to global democracy? Try adding several different time zones!  Mvemba is joined by Marti Flacks (Director of the Human Rights Initiative at CSIS), Tiseke Kasambala (Director of Africa Programs at Freedom House) and Kate Hixon (Africa Advocacy Director at Amnesty International USA).  They discuss the March 2023 Summit for Democracy (which will be co-hosted by the U.S. and Costa Rica, the Netherlands, Republic of Korea, and Republic of Zambia), the state of democracy and human rights in African countries, disconnects between civil society and governments ahead of key elections taking place in Africa in 2023, and the lingering impacts of the 2022 U.S.-Africa Leaders' Summit.

In this solo episode, Nadine gives a brief update on previous bills mentioned on TWR. She also shares some upcoming events as well as opportunities to share with either MNJRC any experiences you've had with cash bail and/or with the Human Rights Initiative at the University of Minnesota any impact police violence and surveillance has had on you or your loved ones.  Upcoming events:  Legal Rights Center (Know Your Rights) and Until We Are All Free Black History Month Event February 22, 2023, 6:30 - 8:30 pm @ Open Book in Minneapolis! There will be free food, guest speakers, and a performance by Lewiee Blaze. We will also sell limited edition and limited batch (50 total) Black History Month STAND shirts (Pictured on TWR's IG page) with a portion of the proceeds going to folks who are currently incarcerated. Shirts are sliding scale, starting at $30. Reserve a shirt in advance for pick up at the event using either PayPal (office@legalrightscenter.org) or Venmo (legarightscentermn). Cash will also be accepted as an in-person form of payment at the event. Second Chance Day on the Hill March 8, 2023, Press Conference – 9:30 a.m. Rally in the Rotunda – 10:30 a.m. Visits with legislators – 12:00 onward. Art From the Inside Exhibit April 5 - 30 at Creators Space in St. Paul, MN   Survey/Research opportunities:  Angela Rose Myers - Former Minneapolis NAACP President -  IG @angelarose_sr  Contact Angela at Myers813@umn.edu or 612-624-8543 Minnesota Justice Research Center use the (MNJRC) link above or call 612-293-8262.

Over the last few years, federal regulators have provided detailed guidance on what they expect to see in E&C programs when it comes to misconduct inquiries or investigations. What do these recent reports, policies, and guidance mean for compliance professionals? In this episode of the Principled Podcast, LRN Director of Thought Leadership and Best Practices Susan Divers is joined by Jon Drimmer, a partner at the law firm Paul Hastings. Listen in as the two discuss the recent guidance from the US Department of Justice as well as DOJ policy impacting corporate compliance programs and ethical culture.  To learn more, download the 2022 Ethics & Compliance Program Effectiveness Report.   Guest: Jon Drimmer Jonathan C. Drimmer is a partner in the Investigations and White Collar Defense practice and is based in the Washington, D.C. office of Paul Hastings. He resolves complex cross-border problems with the benefit of having sat in every chair at the table: senior legal officer for a global 500 company, federal prosecutor, and seasoned advocate. He is a recognized international expert on anti­corruption and business and human rights, and is a frequent speaker, author, and commentator on issues related to both topics. Before joining Paul Hastings, he was Deputy General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer of Barrick Gold, one of the world's largest mining companies, with operations on five continents. The compliance program he built at Barrick has served as an industry standard, and elements of it have largely been duplicated by numerous other companies inside and outside of the extractive sector. Mr. Drimmer has directed hundreds of investigations around the world related to anti-corruption, human rights, AML and export controls, tax controversies, environmental incidents, public disclosures, fatalities and health and safety injuries, sexual harassment and discrimination, and other areas. He has represented companies and individuals in numerous government enforcement proceedings in the U.S. and overseas, in relation to FCPA and bribery claims, human rights issues, and a wide array of other matters. He has participated in dozens of major disputes in the U.S., Canada, and abroad, including transnational torts, anti-corruption claims, environmental cases, international arbitrations, tax disputes, construction claims, and land controversies. He previously served in the Justice Department as Deputy Director of the Criminal Division's Office of Special Investigations, where he led cross-border investigations, first-chaired numerous prosecutions, and argued federal appeals. He was a partner at an Am Law 100 law firm in Washington, D.C., a former Bristow Fellow in the Office of the U.S. Solicitor General, and a judicial clerk on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Mr. Drimmer served on the board of directors of the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights Initiative from 2012-2014, and again from 2015-2017. He served on the board of TRACE International from 2012 until 2018, and currently sits on the board of the TRACE Foundation. He has also taught international law courses at Georgetown University Law Center for nearly 20 years.   Host: Susan Divers Susan Divers is the director of thought leadership and best practices with LRN Corporation. She brings 30+ years' accomplishments and experience in the ethics and compliance arena to LRN clients and colleagues. This expertise includes building state-of-the-art compliance programs infused with values, designing user-friendly means of engaging and informing employees, fostering an embedded culture of compliance, and sharing substantial subject matter expertise in anti-corruption, export controls, sanctions, and other key areas of compliance. Prior to joining LRN, Mrs. Divers served as AECOM's Assistant General for Global Ethics & Compliance and Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer. Under her leadership, AECOM's ethics and compliance program garnered six external awards in recognition of its effectiveness and Mrs. Divers' thought leadership in the ethics field. In 2011, Mrs. Divers received the AECOM CEO Award of Excellence, which recognized her work in advancing the company's ethics and compliance program. Before joining AECOM, she worked at SAIC and Lockheed Martin in the international compliance area. Prior to that, she was a partner with the DC office of Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal. She also spent four years in London and is qualified as a Solicitor to the High Court of England and Wales, practicing in the international arena with the law firms of Theodore Goddard & Co. and Herbert Smith & Co. She also served as an attorney in the Office of the Legal Advisor at the Department of State and was a member of the U.S. delegation to the UN working on the first anti-corruption multilateral treaty initiative.  Mrs. Divers is a member of the DC Bar and a graduate of Trinity College, Washington D.C. and of the National Law Center of George Washington University. In 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ethisphere Magazine listed her as one the “Attorneys Who Matter” in the ethics & compliance area. She is a member of the Advisory Boards of the Rutgers University Center for Ethical Behavior and served as a member of the Board of Directors for the Institute for Practical Training from 2005-2008. She resides in Northern Virginia and is a frequent speaker, writer and commentator on ethics and compliance topics.  For a transcript of this podcast, please visit the episode page at LRN.com.

This episode is sponsored by Roofstock onChain.The crypto world has been a little different every week after the fallout with FTX and the image of Sam Bankman-Fried versus the reality of what was actually happening has created distrust in the crypto industry. So where do we begin to ask the right questions to balance the need for security with privacy for the future? On this episode of “Money Reimagined,” hosts Michael Casey and Sheila Warren speak with Juan Zarate, senior adviser for Transnational Threats Project and Human Rights Initiative at CSIS, the Center for Strategic and International Studies; to discuss how crypto companies can better prepare themselves for financial risks and what is a “rogue state.” -This episode was produced and edited by Michele Musso with announcements by Adam B. Levine and our executive producer, Jared Schwartz. Our theme song is “Shepard.”-Roofstock onChain allows you to instantly transfer ownership of real-world homes using standard NFT smart contracts. Buy and sell homes with one-click, pay with crypto, and access DeFi lending options. Find our web3 homes at onchain.roofstock.com or your favorite NFT marketplace.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This episode is sponsored by Roofstock onChain.The crypto world has been a little different every week after the fallout with FTX and the image of Sam Bankman-Fried versus the reality of what was actually happening has created distrust in the crypto industry. So where do we begin to ask the right questions to balance the need for security with privacy for the future? On this episode of “Money Reimagined,” hosts Michael Casey and Sheila Warren speak with Juan Zarate, senior adviser for Transnational Threats Project and Human Rights Initiative at CSIS, the Center for Strategic and International Studies; to discuss how crypto companies can better prepare themselves for financial risks and what is a “rogue state.” -This episode was produced and edited by Michele Musso with announcements by Adam B. Levine and our executive producer, Jared Schwartz. Our theme song is “Shepard.”-Roofstock onChain allows you to instantly transfer ownership of real-world homes using standard NFT smart contracts. Buy and sell homes with one-click, pay with crypto, and access DeFi lending options. Find our web3 homes at onchain.roofstock.com or your favorite NFT marketplace.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This episode is sponsored by Roofstock onChainThe crypto world has been a little different every week after the fallout with FTX and the image of Sam Bankman-Fried versus the reality of what was actually happening has created distrust in the crypto industry. So where do we begin to ask the right questions to balance the need for security with privacy in the future? On this episode of “Money Reimagined,” hosts Michael Casey and Sheila Warren speak with Juan Zarate, senior adviser for Transnational Threats Project and Human Rights Initiative at CSIS, the Center for Strategic and International Studies; to discuss how crypto companies can better prepare themselves for financial risks and what is a “rogue state.” -This episode was produced and edited by Michele Musso with announcements by Adam B. Levine and our executive producer, Jared Schwartz. Our theme song is “Shepard.”-Roofstock onChain allows you to instantly transfer ownership of real-world homes using standard NFT smart contracts. Buy and sell homes with one-click, pay with crypto, and access DeFi lending options. Find our web3 homes at onchain.roofstock.com or your favorite NFT marketplace.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

What you'll learn in this podcast episode Over the last few years, federal regulators have provided detailed guidance on what they expect to see in E&C programs when it comes to misconduct inquiries or investigations. What do these recent reports, policies, and guidance mean for compliance professionals? In this episode of the Principled Podcast, LRN Director of Thought Leadership and Best Practices Susan Divers is joined by Jon Drimmer, a partner at the law firm Paul Hastings. Listen in as the two discuss the recent guidance from the US Department of Justice as well as DOJ policy impacting corporate compliance programs and ethical culture.      Featured guest: Jon Drimmer Jonathan C. Drimmer is a partner in the Investigations and White Collar Defense practice and is based in the Washington, D.C. office of Paul Hastings. He resolves complex cross-border problems with the benefit of having sat in every chair at the table: senior legal officer for a global 500 company, federal prosecutor, and seasoned advocate. He is a recognized international expert on anti­corruption and business and human rights, and is a frequent speaker, author, and commentator on issues related to both topics. Before joining Paul Hastings, he was Deputy General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer of Barrick Gold, one of the world's largest mining companies, with operations on five continents. The compliance program he built at Barrick has served as an industry standard, and elements of it have largely been duplicated by numerous other companies inside and outside of the extractive sector. Mr. Drimmer has directed hundreds of investigations around the world related to anti-corruption, human rights, AML and export controls, tax controversies, environmental incidents, public disclosures, fatalities and health and safety injuries, sexual harassment and discrimination, and other areas. He has represented companies and individuals in numerous government enforcement proceedings in the U.S. and overseas, in relation to FCPA and bribery claims, human rights issues, and a wide array of other matters. He has participated in dozens of major disputes in the U.S., Canada, and abroad, including transnational torts, anti-corruption claims, environmental cases, international arbitrations, tax disputes, construction claims, and land controversies. He previously served in the Justice Department as Deputy Director of the Criminal Division's Office of Special Investigations, where he led cross-border investigations, first-chaired numerous prosecutions, and argued federal appeals. He was a partner at an Am Law 100 law firm in Washington, D.C., a former Bristow Fellow in the Office of the U.S. Solicitor General, and a judicial clerk on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Mr. Drimmer served on the board of directors of the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights Initiative from 2012-2014, and again from 2015-2017. He served on the board of TRACE International from 2012 until 2018, and currently sits on the board of the TRACE Foundation. He has also taught international law courses at Georgetown University Law Center for nearly 20 years.   Featured Host: Susan Divers Susan Divers is the director of thought leadership and best practices with LRN Corporation. She brings 30+ years' accomplishments and experience in the ethics and compliance arena to LRN clients and colleagues. This expertise includes building state-of-the-art compliance programs infused with values, designing user-friendly means of engaging and informing employees, fostering an embedded culture of compliance, and sharing substantial subject matter expertise in anti-corruption, export controls, sanctions, and other key areas of compliance. Prior to joining LRN, Mrs. Divers served as AECOM's Assistant General for Global Ethics & Compliance and Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer. Under her leadership, AECOM's ethics and compliance program garnered six external awards in recognition of its effectiveness and Mrs. Divers' thought leadership in the ethics field. In 2011, Mrs. Divers received the AECOM CEO Award of Excellence, which recognized her work in advancing the company's ethics and compliance program. Before joining AECOM, she worked at SAIC and Lockheed Martin in the international compliance area. Prior to that, she was a partner with the DC office of Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal. She also spent four years in London and is qualified as a Solicitor to the High Court of England and Wales, practicing in the international arena with the law firms of Theodore Goddard & Co. and Herbert Smith & Co. She also served as an attorney in the Office of the Legal Advisor at the Department of State and was a member of the U.S. delegation to the UN working on the first anti-corruption multilateral treaty initiative.  Mrs. Divers is a member of the DC Bar and a graduate of Trinity College, Washington D.C. and of the National Law Center of George Washington University. In 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ethisphere Magazine listed her as one the “Attorneys Who Matter” in the ethics & compliance area. She is a member of the Advisory Boards of the Rutgers University Center for Ethical Behavior and served as a member of the Board of Directors for the Institute for Practical Training from 2005-2008. She resides in Northern Virginia and is a frequent speaker, writer and commentator on ethics and compliance topics.    Principled Podcast Transcript Intro: Welcome to the Principled Podcast, brought to you by LRN. The Principled Podcast brings together the collective wisdom on ethics, business and compliance, transformative stories of leadership and inspiring workplace culture. Listen in to discover valuable strategies from our community of business leaders and workplace change makers. Susan Divers:  Good afternoon. From time to time, but particularly in the last few years, federal regulators have provided detailed guidance on what they expect to see in ethics and compliance programs when companies present them as a defense to misconduct inquiries or investigations. What do the recent flurry of reports, policies and guidance mean for compliance professionals? How should they be applied to improve E and C programs? Hello, and welcome to another episode of LRN's Principled Podcast. I'm your host, Susan Divers, director of thought leadership and best practices at LRN. And today, I'm joined by Jon Drimmer, a partner at the international law firm of Paul Hastings. We're going to talk about the recent DOJ guidance and policy impacting corporate compliance programs and ethical culture, and hopefully help everyone understand what it is and how they should apply it to their programs. Jon is a real expert, as well as a friend in this space. He has the unusual distinction of serving in three of the principal seats that affect ethics and compliance, once as a federal prosecutor at DOJ, another time as a chief ethics and compliance officer and deputy general council for a large mining company, and now as an ethics and compliance advocate with a leading law firm. Jon, thanks so much for joining me at Principled Podcast. Jon Drimmer: Thanks, Susan. It's great to be with you. Susan Divers: Super. Well, let's jump right in. Last week, we saw a new policy come out of the Department of Justice that both Lisa Monaco and also Ken Polite have talked about with great emphasis. We've also seen the report come out of the sentencing commission about their 30 years of accomplishments. And we've also seen some major guidance in the last two years. Can you put it in perspective for us and talk about how it fits together, and how they interplay. And then we can jump in and start figuring out what they mean. Jon Drimmer: Yeah. No, happy to do it. So let me take each one in sequence. So what we saw come down from the deputy attorney general was a new policy memo. And in essence, what that means is policies are, they are the rules that apply to federal prosecutors and prosecuting entities around the country. They are the standards that are going to be applied. Guidance, which is something that we see come out in a number of different ways through formal guidance as well as through statements and speeches and other informal approaches, this is basically how those rules are interpreted, how prosecutors should be thinking about the application of those policies as they're applied to any given circumstance. And then finally, reports, and you mentioned the sentencing commission's 30 year look back, those are more general. And they do tend to come out for transparency purpose, they're often retrospective, like the sentencing commission report. But they generally talk about how these rules have been applied. So policies are the rules, the guidance effectively aids in their interpretation, and the reports generally are a bit of a look back as to how they have been applied to date. Susan Divers: That's really helpful. It really helps me put all of those in perspective. Talk a little bit more than about the policies and the guidance. Are they mandatory? Are they voluntary? Jon Drimmer: Well, for prosecutors, they're mandatory. So when you look at the policies, this is effectively how prosecutors are to approach any given situation. It is a directive to them in terms of how it is they should go about doing their jobs. And I'll tell you it's critical. It's critical for chief compliance officers to understand those types of initiatives, those types of emphases. It's critical to prosecutors as well, as they get that direction in terms of what they should be focusing on. So really, it's a very important part of the process and helping to shape how investigations are run and scoped from the government's end, and what can be expected on the company side as well for chief compliance officers. Susan Divers: But it's not technically a rule, if I'm correct. But it sounds like you strongly recommend that ethics and compliance professionals pay great attention to it. Jon Drimmer: Yeah, yeah. No, that's fair. It's not a regulation. It isn't something that goes through a formal regulatory process. It's not the equivalent of a law. It's a direction. It's a directive that's basically given. And so it doesn't have the force of law, but it is a very important set of instruments to understand the relevant DOJ policies, the justice manual. So yeah, that's a fair assessment. I do strongly recommend understanding it in detail, but it isn't technically a law or regulation. Susan Divers: And if I understand correctly, and I've been in this situation myself too as a chief ethics compliance officer, if there's a misconduct inquiry or investigation, and 95% of those are resolved without prosecution or probably more, basically, you'll be asked to come in and meet with the Department of Justice prosecutors, possibly the SEC too, and part of that is talking about your ethics and compliance program. Can you put that in context and explain why they want you to do that, and how you should do it? Jon Drimmer: Yeah, absolutely. So what they're really looking for is a discussion of A, what the compliance program was at the time of the incident in question, and where it is today at the time of charging. It's really both time periods are really quite important to them. And they want to understand how with a compliance program the issue or event might have occurred. But they also want to understand what changes have been made to improve its effectiveness since that time period. And often, given the way that investigations go and timelines, there may be a good bit of time between the original incident and the time a formal compliance program presentation is ultimately made. And in making that presentation, the guidance, the policies, these are incredibly important in shaping the factors that you're ultimately going to present on. But the real tip is not just presenting on the formal approach, the formal program, the policies, procedures. But how do you know they are working in practice? And that has been a huge emphasis from the government in the last couple of years, and one that ethics and compliance professionals should take heed of. It's not just a matter of rolling out the program, but with the rollout, including those steps to validate its effectiveness in mitigating the relevant risks it's designed to address. Susan Divers: I want to get into that in more depth in just a second. But before we leave sort of setting the scene for why this is so important. So if you go in and you meet with the Department of Justice and its prosecutors, and you do a good job, a credible job, of presenting your ethics and compliance program, and it's clear that it's a strong program, and you've got hopefully evidence of effectiveness, what's the consequence of that? Jon Drimmer: Well, at the end of the day, I mean, the most significant issue is monitors. And if you've been involved in an issue that violates a federal law, federal criminal law, and the question is: Are you sufficiently capable of addressing your compliance issues going forward without day to day regular oversight from a monitor? That is a critical inquiry, and so number one, an effective compliance program and design and implementation is really important for a monitor. It's also important in charging decisions. It can be important in terms of disgorgement and fines and penalties as well. It's taken into account in the federal sentencing guidelines. So in the end, an effective compliance program really is a critically important part of a resolution process for a DOJ investigation. Susan Divers: So that's basically why ethics and compliance programs, if I understand correctly, came into being. It's really to mitigate the impact of misconduct investigations, and hopefully allow the company to go forward with it's E and C program. We won't talk about monitors today. That can be another podcast. But that's something that you want to avoid, generally. Jon Drimmer: Yeah. You generally want to avoid that, yeah. I mean, look, there's another element we probably won't get into today as well, that you and I have talked about extensively, and that is how programs ultimately help shape the values and culture of a company, so aside entirely from proactively mitigating relevant risks, affirmatively driving a culture that does increase productivity, increase retention, increase morale, that's a critical component of a compliance, an ethics and compliance program as well. It does dovetail a bit with culture of compliance, which is something that is important to demonstrate when you're in front of the government. It's something the government is increasingly emphasizing. There's a positive aspect that isn't just preventing potential problems from happening that are associated with ethics and compliance programs, as you've written about quite persuasively. Susan Divers: Well, you too. And I'm glad you reminded everybody of that because that is a critical reason for having an effective ethics and compliance programs. So let's leave the sort of rewards and penalties side and start talking about: What are the prosecutors and the Department of Justice leadership really saying in this plethora of policies, guidance that's come out in the last couple of years? What are the key messages? Jon Drimmer: Yeah. I would say in reading through the recent speeches, the policies, coupled with the guidance, I think we can take away several messages. And two of them are, number one, there is this enormous focus on program effectiveness, and I can't say that enough. And as I read the memo from the deputy attorney general colloquially calling the Monaco memo, I see as a major sub theme, and as a former chief compliance officer, this absolute drive towards the effectiveness of programs. And just to take a step back for a minute, in some ways, this is how the sentencing commission's report actually becomes relevant in this discussion, and the 30 year look back report was issued roughly at the same time as the DAG memo. And if you look at the report, a few interesting statistics jump out. And these again, this is focusing on companies that actually went through a court sentencing, so it isn't settlements, which is typically how corporate resolutions are resolved. But 2021 was the first year that more than half of the companies sentenced under the guidelines had a compliance and ethics program. And the previous high was 2018, when it was about 28%. But in 30 years, since 1992, only 11 companies have had a reduction by a court because their compliance program was effective. That's .5% of all of the companies sentenced, and most of those are actually small companies. So most of the time, for those companies that are going through the process, they aren't getting credit for having an effective program. And with the Monaco Memo, if you actually look at a lot of what policies are ultimately looking to drive, it does center around effectiveness, driving performance, driving commitment through a focus on individuals. And so it talks about producing information in a timely way, focusing on individuals because that is what incentivizes effective performance. For chief compliance officers, it might mean if you're going to do an investigation, a thorough investigation, you do have to include that within your scope, the focus on individual culpability to a degree that you might not have before. The same is true with ephemeral messaging, which is a big emphasis in the recent memo. Ephemeral messaging has been part of their calculus for several years now. But here, they do want to focus on whether the company policies regarding ephemeral messaging are effective. Is the company capturing messaging that's occurring on company related devices? Are we allowing personal devices? If so, are they limited to certain apps that are capturing company business related discussions? Is there training? Is there auditing? Are there other steps on ephemeral messaging? So they really want to see not just: Are there policies? But are they effective? And those are just two examples. But if you do dig into what's behind a lot of these policy announcements in the memo, it really is looking to drive effective programs. Susan Divers: Well, I want to dig in a little bit. And just to clarify by ephemeral messaging, you mean that if we have senior execs using What's App to communicate, rather than company systems that are subject to discovery, then we might have a problem. Jon Drimmer: Yeah. It can be company, it can be teams messaging, it can be What's App on company issued devices or personal devices. It's any of the messaging systems that are used to communicate that ultimately may not ordinarily be retained by the company in the way that email is. Susan Divers: So that's an area that the policy makes clear, compliance officers ought to really take a hard look at and may need to make some changes, or at least provide some clarity. I want to get information effectiveness more in a minute too. But just to deal with the other very specific granular recommendation that I saw in the Monaco Memo, it was that you really have to have an incentive system that's aligned to ethics and compliance. And by that, it's both positive and negative. In other words, you have to reward ethical behavior as part of your system of incentives, whether it's bonuses, compensation, promotions. And you have to penalize misbehavior, whether it's bonuses, compensation, promotions, but also claw backs. Can you talk about that a little bit? Jon Drimmer: Yeah, yeah. It really was fairly prescriptive, as you say, in terms of, in ways that I think should make chief compliance officers happy. That's the stuff that we always advocate for with human resources and with executives. Hey, we want ethics. We want ethics and compliance included in hiring decisions and promotions and bonus frameworks and performance commitments. And that's really what helps integrate ethics and compliance into business operations and prioritize it along with operational considerations, so that should be welcome news for chief compliance officers. The claw back aspect, which is the stick, that's the carrot, this is the stick, it's interesting. They really emphasize it's not good enough just to have claw back provisions that are theoretically applicable, that are present in policies and are never applied. They want to see them applied in cases where there is appropriate individual culpability. And that may mean applied in different ways. They're clearer that there is no uniform approach to a claw back provision, but it isn't good enough just to have it as a policy. You need to talk about it. You need to train on it. And you need to actually implement it in appropriate situations, which is part of the focus on the individual responsibility and again, driving effectiveness. Susan Divers: That's a very good segue into effectiveness. I do want to emphasize what you said, which is this is something that ethics and compliance professionals need to pay attention to. And it should be a welcome development to have that kind of accountability and importance placed on ethics and compliance considerations. But it's: What do you do about it, as you said, if you've got claw back? I think the SEC says that about 50% of publicly traded companies have claw back, but you have to use it. Otherwise, you're probably worse off if you have it as a tool and then you don't use it if you've got senior level misconduct. Jon Drimmer: Yeah, I think that's right. But better to have it than not have it, and if you've got it, you've actually got to apply it, is kind of what they're signaling. But look, this is hard. I mean, it is really hard when you are doing investigations of your own people. As a chief compliance officer, this was the least favorite part of my job is doing investigations into people I work with, people I knew, people who in other aspects of my job, I had to trust. I had to trust them in terms of implementing or overseeing certain aspects of the program. And when you have to do an investigation into them, it feels lousy. It screams out for why independence is important. And those particular instances is just a matter of investigative integrity, but it's a lousy part of the job. And applying a claw back provision to senior executives who you have worked with, who you have traveled with, whatever it is, it's a lousy part of the job, but they are saying it is an important part and a part that has to be applied in practice. Susan Divers: Yeah. I agree with you. That is really the worst part of being a chief ethics and compliance officer, for sure. Let's dive deeper into effectiveness. As I've gotten to know you and worked with you on thought leadership, I've always been extremely impressed with you focus when you're a chief ethics and compliance officer on effectiveness. And I remember some of the things you did, even including short pulse surveys in your investigations to get feedback from employees, so that's just one example. But can you talk about what do we really mean by effectiveness in terms of ethics and compliance programs? What should we be measuring? What should we be looking at? And where should the focus be? Jon Drimmer: Yeah. I mean, really what effectiveness means is: Are the goals of any particular element of your program being achieved? Are you meeting the goals that you have set out for that particular element of the program? So for instance, your goal might be to roll out a new training, and to roll it out to 90% of everybody on a mapped basis. That isn't going to get into effectiveness. Effectiveness is: How well do they retain the critical aspects of the content that is being conveyed? And that can be done through surveys, that can be done through tests, et cetera. But when we're talking about effectiveness here, again, it isn't just about roll out, it isn't just about robustness and good faith commitment to implementing a program. But is it working in practice? How do you know it? How do you test it? How do you validate it? Often, that's done through KPIs and through metrics. I personally like surveys, sentiment survey, I've always liked surveys as a way of getting information. And beyond that, it brings employees into the program when they are talking to you, providing information about their own experiences. I think that's a very effective way to do it. I think 360s in terms of reviews that include ethics compliance is another important part, so you do again get perspectives of employees on individual performance, particularly for supervisors, from an ethics and compliance standpoint. I think you need to look at audit results. I think you need to look at investigations. I think you need to look at a number of different factors that all indicate on a lag indicating basis, what is working and what isn't working. But I think that should be a relentless focus, personally. And I think for every element of your program, you should be looking at multiple ways to try to assess. Is what I'm doing actually working to the degree that I want it to, and in the way that I want it to? And if not, you have to make an adjustment. That's what effectiveness is about. Susan Divers: That's a really good definition. I think one of the traps people can fall into easily is to focus on activities rather than impact. And I like your phrasing of it as a relentless focus on effectiveness. I mean, one of the things we're just doing is rolling out a short, I think it's 10 question ethical culture pulse survey that comes up at the end of a code of conduct course. And it asks questions about respect and trust and organizational justice, which as you know are key elements of an ethical culture. So always trying to get at perceptions and concerns and to the degree that you can measure how that's playing out, I think is really essential to effectiveness. I want to talk about in a minute how non US companies are affected by all this, and also the most common mistakes you've seen people make in your long and in depth, varied career. But before we get there, I was just looking at some of the DOJ material, and I see that Matt Galvin has joined the team. And now I think there's at least three or four former chief ethics and compliance officers. And Matt came for Anheuser, and he has a particular focus on data analytics. What are you seeing in terms of using data analytics for effectiveness? And what do you recommend in that area? Jon Drimmer: I think that's a great hire. I think it'll be great for Matt, and I think that's a great hire for the government, really bringing in somebody who ran a compliance program and who has had a very substantial focus on data analytics. And at AB InBev, the Brew Right program that he put together is one that's usually been held up as an industry leader. I mean, I do think data analytics is critically important. One of the challenges with data analytics that you have to always get around is making sure that your data is good, that things are being recorded and described in like manners that allows for apples to apples comparison. And you have to understand what to do with that information. And so it's not enough to run the analytics, but when you get the analytics back, you have to have a program in place, resources in place, to act on it. And so thinking through holistically what the data is, where it's coming from, how you're going to act on it, depending on what you get is all a really important part of the equation to think about ahead of time before you just start collecting and running. Look, it's critically important. It's been something that's been emphasized for years as a key way of identifying effectiveness, as well as potential risks that you might not otherwise see, and trends, and patterns. So it really is a very important part of a program with the caveat that you've got to make sure that your data is really good and that you know what you're going to do with it on the back end. But that's a great hire, and I'm sure it's really going to advance compliance thinking in the government around the use of data. Susan Divers: I think that's a good way to characterize the importance of data metrics and particularly stressing that it's not enough to have them and get the insights, you have to act on them. It's similar to risk analysis and risk assessment. It's great that you're running a yearly risk assessment, but are you factoring those results into your training or your policies? So that's part of that focus on effectiveness. Talk to me a little bit, Jon, if you would, about we've been talking about the Department of Justice. It does seem to me that what DOJ does in areas like this has a lot of impact on international companies. It's not limited to the US. And you're in a great position to discuss that a bit, if you would. Jon Drimmer: Yeah, sure. Of course. No, absolutely. Look, and to be clear, when the government emphasizes things like data and benchmarking and metrics and KPIs, I can't applaud them enough for bringing in someone like Matt, who has seen it on the ground, has put into place a great program to really help educate. And that's going to be true for US and non US companies. The government focuses on violations of the law, where there is jurisdiction, where there's something that will touch the US, or you have US companies or US issuers. But if you're a foreign company and you're doing business in the United States, or you're listed on a US exchange, the US laws very well may apply to you. The FCPA certainly very well may apply to you. And some of the biggest settlements, again just sticking with the FCPA, have been with non US companies in the last two years. And I don't want to limit this to the FCPA because the memo from Lisa Monaco, it's not limited to the FCPA, but it will extend to throughout the criminal division. And so whether it's antitrust, or healthcare fraud, or other areas that the criminal division might oversee, this is going to apply to companies regardless of whether they're US or non US, depending on the jurisdictional components, so it's a very important part for all companies doing business in the United States, not just US companies. Susan Divers: And I think sometimes people forget how broad that actually is. People sort of think, "Okay, there's US companies, there's French companies, there's Indian companies," but if you're doing business here, or you're using the banking system, then you are basically within the ambit of US jurisdiction if you commit bribery violations, or antitrust, or sanctions violations, or whatever they happen to be. So it really is a very broad net. And I think for that reason, I think the guidance has driven the evolution of ethics and compliance programs globally, not just in the US. Is that your sense too? Jon Drimmer: Yeah. Yeah. No question about it. I think if you look around the world, whether it's the UK, or France, or throughout Latin America, for those governments that have formally put out either guidances, or they've integrated into their laws what compliance programs ought to look like, I mean, it really looks a lot like what the Department of Justice and the SEC have put out, which of course is premised on a sentencing guidelines foundation. But really, it is driving global compliance processes and programs around the world, even for those companies that don't touch the US, even in their home jurisdictions. It's driving very similar approaches and ways of thinking about compliance. Susan Divers: Yes. And I think if anybody needs proof of that, they should read the Glencore CPA settlement, which I was just looking at, which is a huge fine for anti bribery for basically a non US company. But we're starting to run out of time. I could do this all day, as you know. But let's wrap up with: Given your unique perspective, having sat in all of the key positions, what are the most common mistakes you see people make in ethics and compliance programs? And if you can relate some of those to the guidance, that would be great. Jon Drimmer: Yeah, sure. Look, I mean,  I think first and foremost, it isn't really understanding and looking to integrate into programs what drives an ethical culture. And we talked before about the absolute importance of organizational justice as one of the key drivers in thinking about how that should get integrated into your program. And another is managerial modeling. And truthfully, what people seem to often forget is that most employees look at their supervisors, and maybe their supervisors' supervisors as the company. They look at them as management. And so focusing on, quote, unquote, tone from the top, and the most senior leaders of a company, to the exclusion of direct supervisors, middle managers, I think is often a mistake. And so driving behaviors expected of managers is critically important. I think people also ignore the absolute singular importance of confidence in internal reporting mechanisms and hotlines, which is often a proxy for whether your culture of compliance is strong, and whether organizational justice exists, whether managerial modeling is occurring. But I think beyond that, we've talked about the focus on effectiveness. And I think too often, you do see compliance programs that really are driving towards activities and robustness and metrics and numbers that don't take into account. Is it really working in practice? And I do think that has to be, especially in light of the guidance, which talks about culture, it talks about effectiveness, it focuses on effectiveness, I think that's got to be a critical emphasis for any program. And I think a lot of programs aren't sufficiently mature in that particular aspect, which may be why this guidance or this policy is coming out now. Susan Divers: So it sounds like if you were advising let's say a startup, or a relatively small company that's program is just getting underway, you would advise them to focus very much on the value side on getting organizational justice right, on getting speak up culture going and creating that atmosphere of trust, and also on making sure that managers know what the ethical and compliance considerations that affect them are, and what that means in practice. Jon Drimmer: Yeah. Yeah, that's exactly right. And look, that relates directly to the guidance as we look at rewards, in terms of pay, of performance commitments, presumably of bonuses, of promotions. So setting those expectations for management, along with organizational justice and speak up, I think are really vital components. And so if you are just starting out, the sooner you look to embed that within the company, the more effective it's going to be hopefully as the company grows. Susan Divers: Wow, this has been such a terrific, insightful conversation. And I really feel like I've benefited a lot personally just from hearing the way you've wove together the policy, the guidance. And just for one point of clarification before we sign off, I've been looking at the guidance since I think 2013. I've seen an evolution, actually. It's gotten stronger and it's gotten smarter in focusing on the right things like culture. I don't see it really weakening or changing, even during the Trump administration, interestingly. Is that your perception as well? Is that your expectation for the future? Jon Drimmer: Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Look, they are clearly sharpening the guidance. They are sharpening their policies in a way that is actually quite healthy. And I completely applaud the degree of transparency that we've seen in terms of talking about how these are applied, in terms of talking about how these are to be interpreted. So I applaud the transparency and I completely agree. It is getting much sharper, particularly around those aspects that really impact compliance professionals, like culture, like incentivization, like trying to establish commitments, like integrating compliance into employment processes. So I think it is getting smarter. And again, I think the transparency is really helpful, and particularly for chief ethics and compliance officers. Susan Divers: Great. And I agree. I mean, it's actually making people's jobs easier if they take the key messages in the guidance and are able to use the guidance to drive change in their organizations. So Jon, thanks so much for joining me on this episode. Just to wrap up, I'm Susan Frank Divers, and I want to thank everyone for listening to Principled Podcast by LRN. Jon Drimmer: Thank you. Outro: We hope you enjoyed this episode. The Principled Podcast is brought to by LRN. At LRN, our mission is to inspire principled performance in global organizations by helping them foster winning ethical cultures rooted in sustainable values. Please visit us at lrn.com to learn more. And if you enjoyed this episode, subscribe to our podcast on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Podcasts, or wherever you listen. And don't forget to leave us a review.  

Key Insights:Suzanne Barakat, M.D. experienced personal tragedy, and was forced to fight through her grief to combat islamophobia in medicine, media, and society. Reluctant Activist. Dr. Barakat's Brother, his wife, and her sister were murdered by a white supremacist for being Muslim. Additionally, two of Dr. Barakat's relatives were assassinated for their political activism and journalism, presumably by the Assad regime. Neither case received much media attention, and Dr. Barakat became a reluctant activist, fighting for media coverage and that the cases be investigated.Health and Human Rights Initiative. This initiative provides pro bono forensic medical evaluations for asylum seekers. Medical professionals perform a full physical exam and psychological evaluation to corroborate the stories of violence from asylum seekers. This process greatly increases the likelihood of obtaining asylum.What Leaders Can Do. Healthcare leaders have a responsibility to ensure that their workforce represents their patient demographic, this leads to better health outcomes and quality of care for patients. Additionally, leaders must play a role in making their staff feel valued and supported, and implement safe and anonymous ways to report violations. This episode is hosted by Joanne Conroy, M.D. She is a member of the Advisory Council for Her Story and is the CEO and President of Dartmouth-Hitchcock and Dartmouth-Hitchcock Health. Relevant Links:Learn more about the Health and Human Rights InitiativeWatch Dr. Barakat's TED talk: “Islamophobia killed my brother. Let's end the hate”

Shownotes: For the 6th episode of The Elephant in the Room podcast in partnership with India Justice Report - we focused on the overburdened Indian prisons. For a very long time India's prison system has been known for overcrowding, unhygienic conditions and the disproportionate number of under trials in the prison population.  The covid-19 pandemic led the Indian Supreme Court to issue directions to the High Court for decongestion of prisons in order to prevent the outbreak of the epidemic in closed spaces. The court directed the constitution of High-Powered Committees (HPCs) at state-levels to oversee the decongestion efforts, while also directing the Under trial Review Committees (UTRC), a district-level body mandated to review cases of prisoners, to meet every week.  However, despite several measures to decongest prisons overcrowding has remained a serious issue, along with a shortage of staff and medical officers. The level of vacancies at the National level means 1 in every three posts has not been filled When we were thinking of the focus for this episode - it was about culling out lessons from the pandemic. Lessons that could help support the drive to sustainably decongest Indian prisons. Is it training for the police to prevent indiscriminate arrests, or is it giving more power to the prison authorities to refuse to intake a prison when maximum sustainable number have been reached? It was also about understanding whether magistrates who know the conditions of local prisons shape their remand powers to ensure that there is no overcrowding.  What is the role of legal aid in solving this problem?  Most importantly, central to the conversations is the role of multiple stakeholders - whose actions and frequent inactions contribute to the overcrowding. How can they be corrected and made accountable, what processes and systems need to be put into place to enable positive action.  I was privileged to speak with Justice Madan B Lokur, a former judge of Supreme Court of India and Sugandha Mathur from the Human Rights Initiative to get their insights on progressing the agenda of prison reform. Thank you Maja and Valay for your support and insights.  Memorable Passages from the podcast

On this episode, https://cgrs.uchastings.edu/about/bio/christine-lin (Christine Lin) and https://profiles.ucsf.edu/william.martinez (William Martinez) discuss the conditions that lead people to seek asylum, how asylum law and policy function as a social determinant of health, and how health and legal professionals can collaborate to support asylum seekers. Further Reading: https://humanrights.ucsf.edu/ (UCSF's Health and Human Rights Initiative ) https://phr.org/ (Physicians for Human Rights ) https://cgrs.uchastings.edu/ (CGRS' Website ) https://cgrs.uchastings.edu/our-work/action-center-support-children-and-families-seeking-refuge (CGRS' Recommended Action Items )

Marti Flacks is the Khosravi Chair in Principled Internationalism and director of the Human Rights Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). The Mitch Albom Show

Rachel Currie Triska is a passionate, forward-thinking leader who finds joy in listening to and building consensus with diverse partners. Well known for her advocacy in areas of justice and equity, Rachel was recently named Champion for the Human Rights Initiative of North Texas. In 2021, She became Vice President, External Affairs for CitySquare, the most comprehensive and effective poverty fighting organization in Dallas.

Governments and tech platforms have moved quickly to take action against Russian state media since the invasion of Ukraine on February 24. But what frameworks exist in international law that could inform our thinking about these complicated questions at the intersection of speech and human rights? To answer that question, I spoke to Vivek Krishnamurthy, the Samuelson-Glushko Professor of Law at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC). Vivek is currently a Fellow at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School, a Faculty Associate of the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, and a Senior Associate of the Human Rights Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.

Residents in war-torn Ukraine are on the run – at least some of them are. Overall, 7 million people are expected to cross its Western border. While this is the largest exodus of its kind from Europe in decades people can be found in desperate attempts to leave their countries throughout the world at any given time, and not everyone has the capability to leave at the same time or are met at their destination with open arms. On this week’s episode of Connect the Dots podcast, Executive Producer Mallory Somera speaks with Dr. Coleen Kivlahan – Medical Director of the University of California San Francisco’s Human Rights asylum clinic and Chair of the UCSF Health and Human Rights Initiative – to catch up on the refugee crisis in Ukraine and discuss difficulties faced by different refugee groups as they search for shelter and security.

Asylum-seekers have been making headlines, but it's rare that we get to read their stories. Our guest today, Suzanne Barakat, reads the stories of asylum seekers every day — in the scars on their skin, and the traumas they bring to the clinic she runs. Suzanne is the Executive Director of the UCSF Health and Human Rights Initiative. Her primary program there is the human rights clinic. There, Suzanne and her team give pro bono medical evaluations. These evaluations help immigrants gain asylum. Her work there is almost as impactful as her story.  Do you have any thoughts? Please email us at hello@rosenmaninstitute.org. We post new episodes every Monday. “The Health Technology Podcast” is produced by Herminio Neto, hosted by Christine Winoto, and engineered by Andrew John Rojek.

*From time to time we'll re-air a previous episode of the show that our newer audience may have missed.* In this episode of Her Story, we sit down with Dr. Coleen Kivlahan, Head of Primary Care and Professor of Family Community Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. We learn about Dr. Kivlahan's long-standing dedication to serving underserved patient populations, and courageous approach to building more equitable systems of care, domestically and internationally.

This episode of But Her Lyrics... is part 2 of track 4, "This Stolen Land," with guest Dr. Meranda Roberts. Shawna and Meranda speak about land acknowledgements, feeling erased from history, and how colonialism and genocide make the current border crisis possible. You don't have to listen in order, but be sure to catch the last episode of But Her Lyrics... for part one of "This Stolen Land" with guest, Emily Heger, an Equal Justice Works legal fellow with the Human Rights Initiative of North Texas. As usual, Shawna also answers questions from patrons and interviews the band about writing this song and the subject matter. The official sponsor of this podcast is First Defense Krav Maga out of Herndon, VA! To become a sponsor or just support the podcast, become a patron at patreon.com/shawnapotter All episode transcriptions and important links can be found right here a few days after the original air date: shawnapotter.com/#/but-her-lyrics-podcast --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/shawnapotter/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/shawnapotter/support

This episode of But Her Lyrics... is part 1 of track 4, "This Stolen Land," with Emily Heger, an Equal Justice Works legal fellow with the Human Rights Initiative of North Texas. Her work focuses on winning asylum for women and girls fleeing gender-based violence. Shawna and Emily really dig into the current issues facing people when they arrive at the border of Texas and Mexico. Be sure to catch the next official episode of But Her Lyrics... for part two! The subject matter of this song is so vast that Shawna will be speaking with Dr. Meranda Roberts on the history of colonialism and genocide within these borders that make the current border crisis possible. The official sponsor of this podcast is First Defense Krav Maga out of Herndon, VA! To become a sponsor or just support the podcast, become a patron at patreon.com/shawnapotter All episode transcriptions and important links can be found right here a few days after the original air date: shawnapotter.com/#/but-her-lyrics-podcast --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/shawnapotter/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/shawnapotter/support

This past December, Tallahassee Mayor John Dailey pledged to incorporate the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights into the day-to-day functioning of city government. In this edition of Perspectives, he's joined by Mark Schlakman from Florida State University's Center for the Advancement of Human Rights who helped craft the initiative.

In this episode of Her Story, we sit down with Dr. Coleen Kivlahan, Head of Primary Care and Professor of Family Community Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. We learn about Dr. Kivlahan's long standing dedication to serving underserved patient populations, and courageous approach to building more equitable systems of care, domestically and internationally.

Bill Holston, executive director of Human Rights Initiative, sat down with Rev. Phil Dieke to discuss Epiphany, but specifically Epiphany through the lens of the refugee, and the work he does at HRI. If you want to know more about HRI you can follow them on social media or check out their website: hrionline.org You can watch this episode on our YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBQbmfyoOJWfugdO47mCcMjoNvCEy-mCZ

A discussion of the visas available to non-citizen victims of violence: U-Visas, VAWA, T-Visas, TPS. Who is eligible for these visas? How long do they last? How many are available? How do they work? Guest: Zeyla Gonzalez, DOJ Accredited Representative with Human Rights Initiative of North Texas

In this episode, Moises speaks with Mark Schneider (CSIS) about Venezuela's crumbling water system, which is having tremendous health impacts on the population. They hear from Venezuelans who have experienced water shortages and discuss what would be needed to restore the water system in a Day After scenario. Mr. Schneider is a senior adviser with the Americas Program and the Human Rights Initiative at CSIS. Voices of Venezuela is a ten-episode miniseries produced by The Future of Venezuela Initiative (FVI) in partnership with the Dracopoulos iDeas Lab at CSIS. Voices of Venezuela is a unique narrative-based podcast that weaves together stories recorded on the ground with commentary from CSIS experts, who will offer their insights from a broader policy perspective. Note: As the Covid-19 pandemic changes rapidly, the quality of this series may vary over the next couple of months. We are still in production remotely so you won't miss out on any new episodes of Voices of Venezuela.

Omar is joined by Madhurima Dhanuka, Programme Head of the Prison Reforms Programme for the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) to discuss the realities prisons in India and how the criminal justice system is responding to the pressures of the pandemic. @CHRI_INT | @Mdhanuka17 You can find a copy of CHRI guidance doc: COVID - 19 and Prisons in the Commonwealth: Ensuring an effective response here https://tinyurl.com/ybp8sf5y @OmarPKhan | @Justice_Focus https://www.justicefocus.org/

Are you sure you're clear on how someone might immigrate to our country through a legal process? It's not as easy as you might think.Bill Holston from the Human Rights Initiative is back on Good God with some amazing stories about people he has represented in immigration court. Tune in to hear these stories and learn more about the real world of immigration.

The Human Rights Initiative at CSIS invites you to an armchair discussion on transatlantic human rights cooperation with the EU Special Representative on Human Rights.   The EU Special Representative for Human Rights, Eamon Gilmore, will discuss the EU’s human rights priorities and opportunities for transatlantic cooperation.  He will focus on the EU’s approach to issues such as the ongoing crisis in Myanmar, additional ways to protect human rights defenders and civil society amidst rising authoritarianism, and human rights abuses across the world including in China.    At a time when the need for multilateral institutions is being questioned, the EU remains deeply committed to them.  Why does the EU continue to believe that these institutions are essential to defending our values and interests, and how can the EU and US work together to improve the human rights situation globally?This event is made possible through general support.

How can art be used to acknowledge conflicting narratives of "home"? In this podcast, Avigail Manneberg, a Minneapolis-based artist and adjunct faculty member in the University of Minnesota Department of Art, and Sonja Kuftinec, a professor in the University of Minnesota Department of Theater Arts and Dance, discuss their project "A Contested Home," which uses art and storytelling to engage themes of forced migration and displacement in the Galilee. This project was made possible by funding from the Human Rights Initiative: https://cla.umn.edu/human-rights/research/human-rights-initiative Their project focuses on a single geographical space called "home" by two different groups: the village of Ya'ad/Mi'ar in the Galilee region of northern Israel. The village of Ya’ad was built in the 1970s and settled by Israeli Jews next to the ruins of the village of Mi’ar, whose Palestinian descendants continue to live in the area. Working with local artists and partners, Manneberg and Kuftinec held workshops focused on personal Mi'ari family narratives and testimonials to confront taboo narratives of forced displacement. More on Civios: https://z.umn.edu/4ft0

The border crisis is all we can think about these days. Images from the news stain our minds and still our hearts. Most Americans agree that we need good immigration policies, but that the current policies aren't working and are inhumane and immoral.Bill Holston, a Dallas immigration lawyer at the Human Rights Initiative of North Texas, Inc., talks about his work with immigrants and refugees and helps educate us on what's really going on at our southern border.

​Listen as the Human Rights Initiative at CSIS holds a discussion on the mass detention and surveillance of Muslims in Xinjiang, China and the risks such technologies may pose as they are implemented in other areas of China and globally.   Over one million Uyghurs and Muslims from other ethnic minority groups have been detained by the Chinese government and sent to “re-education” internment camps.  Sources indicate that detainees are psychologically and physically abused. Uyghurs outside the camps in Xinjiang are also not free, as they are kept under constant surveillance, often using advanced technology. The Chinese government is increasingly testing this technology in Xinjiang and exporting it nationally and globally, with concerning implications for democracy and human rights.   This event will focus on how this surveillance technology is being used and disseminated across the globe, which poses a risk of great harm to human rights and democracy, particularly if deployed without adequate safeguards.

The Human Rights Initiative of CSIS invites you to a public launch event of the 2019 Global Peace Index (GPI). The Global Peace Index is the world’s leading measure of global peacefulness, ranking 163 countries and territories according to their level of relative peacefulness. Created by the Institute for Economics and Peace, the report presents the most comprehensive data-driven analysis to-date on trends in peace and its economic value. The report findings will be followed by a panel discussion considering the implications of closing civic space and inequality for peace. It will look particularly at the factors that IEP has found to be necessary preconditions for peace in its Positive Peace Report, many of which rely on an active civil society and limits on inequality.This event is made possible by the Institute of Economics and Peace (IEP).

The Human Rights Initiative of CSIS invites you to listen in on a public launch event of the 2019 Global Peace Index (GPI). The Global Peace Index is the world’s leading measure of global peacefulness, ranking 163 countries and territories according to their level of relative peacefulness. Created by the Institute for Economics and Peace, the report presents the most comprehensive data-driven analysis to-date on trends in peace and its economic value. The report findings will be followed by a panel discussion considering the implications of closing civic space and inequality for peace. It will look particularly at the factors that IEP has found to be necessary preconditions for peace in its Positive Peace Report, many of which rely on an active civil society and limits on inequality.

The growth of markets is one of the most significant socioeconomic developments to occur in North Korea over the past two decades. While many understand that North Korea now has a thriving market system, the important role that the women of North Korea play is not as well known or appreciated. The CSIS Korea Chair and the North Korea Freedom Coalition invite you to join us for a special event featuring expert discussions on markets and civil society in North Korea as well as a presentation of Beyond Parallel's mapping of 436 officially sanctioned markets across North Korea. The panel discussion will be followed by testimonies from North Korean escapees on the importance of women's roles and experiences in North Korea's markets. 2:00 PM | WELCOMING REMARKSMr. H. Andrew Schwartz, Chief Communications Officer, CSISDr. Suzanne Scholte, Chair, North Korea Freedom Coalition 2:05 PM | SESSION I: Markets and Civil Society in North KoreaMs. Amy Lehr, Director, Human Rights Initiative, CSIS Dr. Victor Cha, Senior Adviser and Korea Chair, CSIS; D.S. Song-KF Professor of Government, Georgetown UniversityDr. Andrew Yeo, Associate Professor and Director of Asian Studies, The Catholic University of AmericaMs. Olivia Enos, Policy Analyst, Asian Studies Center, The Heritage Foundation 2:55 PM | SESSION II: Women in the Markets Dr. Suzanne Scholte, North Korea Freedom CoalitionMs. Lee, Hyo-joo, North Korean Escapee with Experience as Wholesale Market Vendor and Diesel Oil TraderMs. Park, Ji-hye, North Korean Escapee with Experience as Rice and Corn TraderMs. Heo, Cho-hee, North Korean Escapee with Experience as Small Consumer Goods TraderMs. Kim, Ji-young, North Korean Escapee 4:00 PM | ADJOURNMENT This event is made possible by the general support to CSIS.

The Human Rights Initiative of CSIS invites you to a public event, “Everything in Moderation: The Unintended Consequences of Regulating Hate Speech.” Over the past year, the topic of what speech should be permitted online has been heavily debated. Attacks on ethnic minorities, harassment of female journalists, and the recent live-streamed terrorist attack in New Zealand have led to calls in the US and globally to impose penalties on technology companies that fail to take down harmful content. For instance, recent EU and Australian proposals threaten severe fines or even jail time if content is not removed rapidly. The event will explore the double-edged sword of regulating speech online. For instance, efforts to minimize hate speech and discrimination online may accidentally limit the free expression of civil society actors. Striking the right balance is essential, but challenging. The event will explore how different companies regulate online speech and varied perspectives on whether and when tech companies should be liable for online speech. It will seek to identify paths forward that protect human rights and society. This event is made possible through general support to CSIS.

Please join the Human Rights Initiative for reflections from U.S. Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD), the author of the Global Magnitsky Act. He will be followed by a panel examining the impact of the Global Magnitsky sanctions, opportunities to improve implementation, and how the sanctions fit within financial sector approaches to human rights and corruption. These sanctions enable targeted designations based on human rights abuse and corruption around the world, and have been imposed on officials and companies in a number of recent high profile situations, including Myanmar, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Nicaragua. Keynote SpeakerU.S. Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD)   PanelRobert Berschinski Senior Vice President Policy at Human Rights FirstRobert Peri Director of US Sanctions at Citibank Joshua White Director of Policy and Analysis at The SentryAndrea Prasow Deputy Washington Director, Human Rights WatchThis event is made possible through general support to CSIS.

Please join the Human Rights Initiative for the launch of a new report: Counterterrorism Measures and Civil Society: Changing the Will and Finding the Way. To combat the global threat of terrorism, countries have passed and implemented numerous laws that inadvertently or intentionally diminished the space for civil society. States conflate terrorism with broader issues of national security, which is then used as a convenient justification to stifle dissent, including civil society actors that aim to hold governments accountable. As the global terror landscape becomes more complex and dire, attacks on the rights to the freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly only increase. This report analyzes the impact of counterterrorism efforts on civic space, examines its manifestations in various socioeconomic and political contexts, and explores various approaches to disentangle and reconcile security and civil society. The launch event will feature a keynote speech by Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. The speech will be followed by an expert panel discussion on aligning security and civic space. This event is made possible by generous support from the Oak Foundation and the Mott Foundation.

Please join the Human Rights Initiative for a discussion about civil society resiliency and sustainability. The current phenomenon of closing civic space prompts civil society actors to explore alternative programmatic and funding models and approaches to sustain their work. It also urges donors to find ways that mutually respond to the challenges confronted by civil society organizations and to their funding priorities. During this event, experts will discuss adaptability challenges both donors and civil society organizations face within restrictive environments, and how best to address them. Panelists will also present on recent reports published through the International Consortium on Closing Civic Space. This event is made possible by support from the Oak Foundation and the Mott Foundation.

Please join the Human Rights Initiative for a discussion about civil society resiliency and sustainability. The current phenomenon of closing civic space prompts civil society actors to explore alternative programmatic and funding models and approaches to sustain their work. It also urges donors to find ways that mutually respond to the challenges confronted by civil society organizations and to their funding priorities. During this event, experts will discuss adaptability challenges both donors and civil society organizations face within restrictive environments, and how best to address them. Panelists will also present on recent reports published through the International Consortium on Closing Civic Space.This event is made possible by support from the Oak Foundation and the Mott Foundation.

This podcast features Shannon Green, who is the Senior Director of Programs at the Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC). This podcast was recorded at the closing of Ms. Green’s time at CSIS. Her concluding remarks pose an optimistic view of the progress of human rights that reflects her hope for continued efforts. She brings deep experience in international development, human rights, and violence prevention with 15 years in the US government, academia, and the nonprofit sector. Prior to joining CIVIC, Ms. Green served as the Director and Senior Fellow of the Human Rights Initiative at CSIS where she served as Managing Director of the Commission on Countering Violent Extremism. Ms. Green also previously served as Senior Director for Global Engagement on the National Security Council. Before joining the White House, Ms. Green worked for USAID for nearly a decade. In this podcast, she discusses how countries cooperate on counterterrorism issues and the steps that governments and civil society need to take to combat violent extremism and other social instabilities.

Childhood Fractured is a Humanities based Human Rights Initiative centered on exploring, defining, and preventing the sexual abuse and exploitation of children. The foundation of this project is a series of 13 paintings each with a written narrative meant to explore the childhood sexual abuse of artist, Allen Vandever. This contemporary artwork functions as a creative interface for the public to be made aware of the realities of childhood sexual abuse told from the male perspective and to foster constructive, critical, and positive dialogues on this topic. The artwork and their respective narratives are currently being compiled into a book. This book will also feature expository writings on the topic of childhood sexual abuse, current medical research, and critical analysis of what we can do as a society in relation to childhood sexual abuse and exploitation.

Chit Chat discussing social justice, community engagement, and arts and activism-issues central to Ambreen Butt’s exhibition at Dallas Contemporary, "What is left of me." Panelists include artist Ambreen Butt, Executive Director of Human Rights Initiative of North Texas Bill Holston, + Director of Ignite / Arts Dallas at SMU Meadows School of the Arts Clyde Valentin. Moderated by DC Director of Exhibitions / Senior Curator Justine Ludwig.

The executive director of Human Rights Initiative of North Texas talks about working with other lawyers to free detainees at DFW Airport. Also discussed: good Dallas beer joints, why it's a bad idea to insult your wife, and what Zac is going to do with his 2 acres under I-345 once the highway is torn down. We covered a lot.

Nearly a century has passed since the Armenian Genocide, but the repercussions of the event still shape relations between Armenia and Turkey, as well as US policy in the region.The most recent round of discussions on normalizing Armenian-Turkish relations broke down in 2010. The two nations have not established diplomatic relations, their border remains closed and Armenians still seek formal recognition of the genocide from the Turkish government. On the international stage, the US seeks a stronger ally in Armenia to help advance its policies in the region. Neighboring both Turkey and Iran, and with close ties to Russia, Armenia has great geostrategic significance for the US. Improved relations between Armenia and Turkey would also advance US interests, as it could lead to greater stability in the region as a whole.Thomas de Waal, an expert on the politics and conflicts of the South Caucasus, will discuss how the Armenian Genocide has shaped contemporary politics both within the region and beyond.Speaker Thomas de Waal is a Senior Associate for the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Keith David Watenpaugh, Director, Human Rights Initiative, University of California, Davis, will moderate the discussion.For more information about this event please visit: http://www.worldaffairs.org/events/event/1396