Introduction

This report outlines the verification process for Human Rights Defender (HRD) cases by Rainbow Railroad intake caseworkers. This document describes howRainbow Railroad’s vetting process aligns with the HRD stream’s definitions and criteria for referral. Requests for help received by Rainbow Railroad undergo thorough verification through civil document review, risk assessment and screening interviews to confirm identity and credibility. Cases move from an initial receipt of request for help or direct referral, to an email screening and evidence collection stage, to the interview and case summary stage with our Intake Casework Team. From this point applications that have been flagged as potential HRDs by the Intake Team, assigned to caseworkers. Caseworkers perform an indepth credibility assessment including conducting another interview, this one is specifically for HRDs, checking the case individual’s references, and working with the individual to complete their application. The application is then submitted for review to the Program Manager responsible for the HRD Stream and then final review goes through the Head of Programs before the case is submitted for consideration.

Receipt of Request for Help

RainbowRailroad utilizes a dual identification approach:

1.Direct referrals of case individuals via established field partner organizations.

2.Centrally submitted requests for help that are verified with the assistance of field partners where applicable. Local organizations, initiatives, activist groups, and human rights defenders with country and regional expertise are integral to both our identification and verification processes.

Rainbow Railroad’s online request for help webform gathers the initial request for help narrative as well as basic demographic and sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics (SOGIESC) information that begins the screening process. Individuals who indicate LGBTQI+ identity, currently reside in a country that does not protect LGBTQI+ rights, and/or do not have status in a country that protects LGBTQI+ rights, are moved to the second stage of verification.

This screening stage allows case individuals (CIs) to share their experiences of persecution based on their LGBTQI+ identity or activism as human rights defenders. If, at this stage, individuals self-identify as an HRD or have experienced risk based on their perceived activism, intake caseworkers flag their case for review in the HRD stream. Our records management system allows for flagging potential HRD cases for in-depth review at any point in the verification process.

Caseworkers follow the HRD definition provided by Protect Defenders, wherein a “human rights defender” is a person who, individually or in association with others, promotes or strives for the protection and realisation of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national or international levels. Intake case workers assess for 2 main criteria in the request for help and subsequent emails:

1.The CI describes persecution they faced as a direct result of their activism work. For example, the CI describes being attacked by government forces at a protest; or,

2.The CI describes persecution they have faced as a result of being perceived as an activist. For instance, waving a rainbow flag in public has been interpreted by discriminatory governments as activism for LGBTQI+ rights. To flag such cases as potential HRDs, caseworkers analyse CI narratives from a queer lens. In Rainbow Railroad’s experience, there are many cases where any expressions of, or expressions of support for, non-normative gender identity or sexuality are considered acts of protest in and of themselves.

Importantly, in both instances, individuals describe risks they face which are directly related to their human rights activism.

It is essential to analyse the actions case individuals describe in this way, because, according to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ Fact Sheet 29, HRDs are identified by what they do, and not by a formal occupation or position. Their human rights activities may be in a full-time or part-time, paid or unpaid, formal or informal, and professional or private capacity, and they need not self-identify as an HRD.