Brazilian Interdisciplinary AIDS Association (ABIA), Global AIDS Policy Watch (GAPW) and Sexuality Policy Watch (SPW) strongly support the All in for #Decrim campaign as part of the global activism surrounding the International Day Against Violence Against Sex Workers on December 17th. In 2013, we published a report with Davida (sex worker rights organization founded by Gabriela Leite in 1992) about sex work, human rights and public policy in Brazil. At that time, we interviewed dozens of government officials and found that there was a profound silence surrounding the topic of prostitution at the federal government level and a lack of public policies that promoted sex worker rights. Today, in 2016, it is hard to believe that we have found ourselves in a worse scenario.
Government plans to freeze social spending in Brazil for 20 years are entirely incompatible with the country’s human rights obligations, according to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Philip Alston. The principal and unavoidable effect of a proposed amendment to the Constitution designed to ‘lock in’ a budget freeze in order to show fiscal prudence will be to harm the poor for decades to come, the expert warned. The amendment, due to be voted on by Brazil’s Senate on 13 December, is known as PEC 55 or the New Fiscal Regime.
The U.S. National Institute of Health announced that a new experimental vaginal insert for HIV prevention had little effect on vaginal intercourse. The ring is being evaluated for effectiveness in the ASPIRE Study in Malawi, South Africa, and Zimbabwe. It releases dapivirine into a woman’s body, similar to contraceptive vaginal insert rings.
“The Politics of Global AIDS”, by Hakan Seckinelgin, develops a new conceptual framework for understanding the international policy response to HIV. The author analyses power and politics at multiple levels. According to Seckinelgin, “this timely book looks critically at the policy response to AIDS and its institutionalization over time. It raises important questions about who benefits, who decides, and in whose interests decisions are made.”