What are the best practices for developing trust with human rights partners and stakeholders?

The best way to create trust is put folks who are impacted by rights violations in positions to make the decisions. They should be supported by resources, both intellectual as well as financial. Most importantly, stay out of their way when decisions are made and don't be surprised if those decisions don't support your goals or agendas.

If the conversation centers around trust regarding human rights and stakeholders, lets use the actual Human Rights Commission as a primary example of what not to do. As an individual who lodged a complaint in Ontario with the HRC against the largest municipal police force, it was my experience that there was little to none transparency in the response received. Not only did I challenge the findings, which received zero acknowledgement, but they resisted resolving my valid concerns. Transparency to public is non-existent in government operations. I challenge their entire premise and mandate. The fact they rely on their stakeholders makes that entity questionable. There is only collusion between the two with intent to discourage transparency.

Being transparent about the methodologies guiding the participatory processes we implement—such as human rights approaches, feminist methodologies, centering perspectives from the Global South, or adopting an anti-racist stance—provides clarity on the principles guiding our work. This transparency not only aids in being accountable for outcomes but also for the processes involved.

In order to build trust, individuals and companies must call out organizations like ACLU that go against civil rights principles. ACLU should be defunded, for during the pandemic they advocated for forced human experimentation with an experimental gene therapy. They argued for more not less censorship, after having a history of fighting for rights of those with detestable views (kkk). If organizations cannot be even handed, they are not in fact benificial, they are extremely harmful. REAL civil rights leaders argue for more freedom, never less. As William Pitt (the younger) said in 1783: Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

It is a rather simple but more practical solution. Your actions, speeches, activities, and results persuade the public that you are delivering credible and palpable results. Not empty promises like politicians and public servants. Show the results, not empty words. Too many promises, inflation of promises, and deficit on delivery are inflation of values.

There is no reconciliation without truth. You cannot pretend to heal the wound if you are holding the knife. Having honest conversations, dismantling the barriers to community driven solutions and self determination while releasing the resources and power to control is a great start. You are the ones you’ve been waiting for….

To instill trust in the intricate landscape of human rights collaboration, adhere to these elevated principles: - Discerning Active Listening: Engage in deep, empathetic listening, valuing partners' perspectives. - Exemplary Honesty and Transparency: Illuminate your intentions, capacities, and conflicts with unwavering honesty. - Intuition as the Arbiter of Negation: Trust your instincts to maintain ethical alignment and be prepared to respectfully decline unsuitable collaborations. - A Renaissance of Mindset: Embrace constant growth, challenge biases, and embrace diversity, demonstrating commitment to the human rights cause.

In my experience, cultural sensitivity, understanding of culture and a collaborative approach, interaction and dialogue that recognises and respects the same.

It is really heartbreaking that the world has been mixed up with so many things that don't matter at all and this has broken community trust trends among human rights partners as these are always interested in numbers and not tangible results from their actions or investments 😔 however, there is still a way to write the wrongs right and this can only be possible if we all accept Localization of the human rights agenda that aims at understanding community rights and needs and not forced agendas that won't lead us anywhere apart from confusion and bleach of trust

Likely I am not responding as expected. But I was invited to offer a contribution and so I will. Be respectful? When there is no continuance of transparency from the human rights and stakeholders, little respect for valuing the valid concerns is demonstrated. There is no respect of autonomy, diversity (in all its forms as indicated by the Canadian human rights tribunal), no dignity given to the severity of claims. When there are branch departments created to assist with workload, (HR legal support centre) who fail to seriously take the claims of applicants but instead deflect them to an outside department, that in itself demonstrated there is no respect reciprocated. HRC and other gov't agencies impose their own limitations & thwart justice

Yes, respect isn't just shown but rather should be earned through action. Walking the talk of respect is the key to unlock 🔓 the future tomorrow

The Stoic Epictetus said, “We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” If you can’t listen you can’t collaborate.

Paying close attention to who represents your stakeholders and whether they have the legitimacy of the community or constituency they are meant to serve is an important considerations for building trust. We often see individuals invited to collaborative multi-stakeholder spaces who are the least critical or "difficult" and/or might operate as a lone expert or consultant and not actually represent the perspective of the constituencies most impacted. Due diligence on legitimate representation is super important for collaborations to be successful in building trust.

I think inclusion is so important. One of the issues that has arisen from an increased emphasis on equity has been putting people in positions without a role in planning and work product. We need to develop worth and inclusion in planning and decision making. I believe that builds trust and demonstrated worth of addressing human rights value

Actually, the collaboration between stakeholders and human rights effectively constricts transparent and respectful procedures, simply because the one hand relies on the other to have elements of bias persist. Again, my contribution may be considered out of context, but having extensive experience with the Canadian HRC, and stakeholders, that's where my dialogue will be taken from. I don't agree with the involvement of stakeholders in corportations, especially the HRC, each is bent on maintaining the current arrangement simply to produce the best result THEY desire. Not necessarily what should be done, with result to promote change and benefit to society or an individual who needs to be heard. The nexus exists to maintain the status-quo.

That is mostly centered among those who have than building capacity of the upcoming partners who will be the leads of the next generation to become more resilient and creative

There are countless leaders in Government and Human rights that create actual legislation defining the need for transparency and accountability to 'partners and stakeholders', yet fail to abide by them. It's all smoke and mirrors and unless someone writes about it, they continue to contradict their reason for having the privilege to have a voice for the public while at the same time not following their own dictate. There is no accountability when they are challenged for failing to perform as expected yet refuse to answer the allegations. By a public who in part pays their exorbitant salaries. There is no acknowledgement for mistakes made. They do not welcome input from outside perspectives. This leads to a continuous lack of accountability.

Definition of ethical: "moral principals that govern a persons behavior or the conducting of an activity". In your supplied description of being ethical, the statement 'respect and protect the rights, interests and well-being of your partners, stakeholders and beneficiaries and avoid any harm or exploitation' raises all kinds of red-flags. How can there be a commitment to ethical operations when the focus is on ensuring that your stakeholders and partners aren't being subjected to harm or exploitation? In order to make positive change for improved best practice-most effective procedures, outside and impartial input is necessary. If confidentiality of these parties is the concern, there can be no transparency. The statement is hypocritical.

For both individuals and companies, ego can be highly destructive. Consistency is certainly valuable, but recognizing and learning from mistakes is even more important. If there's one thing you should consistently uphold, it's your commitment to do the right thing. It's easier to trust a company that acknowledges and strives to improve upon its mistakes, rather than a company that rigidly adheres to its principles and attempts to minimize damage even when errors are glaringly obvious. This task becomes even more challenging when a position has already been taken with stakeholders or publicly disclosed. However, the ability to overcome this challenge is undoubtedly the factor that can either make or break a project. Actual example: UNITY

To be more specific here, I would add be principled. Human rights work is always threatened by politicization. In order to build effective partnerships, partners should be consistent in applying human rights standards and avoid double standards based on political contexts. This proves to be difficult sometimes for national partners, especially in situations where the political polarization is very high.

Listening is the number one way to build trust you need to hear people and see them in a way that enables then to feel valued. This is critical in most things in life but so easy to forget.

Consistency in keeping to established principles, teamwork spirit and effective collaboration with stakeholders are vital to building trust within human rights circles.