COUNCIL HEARS FROM EXPERTS ON INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS, SUMMARY EXECUTIONS AND INDEPENDENCE OF JUDGES AND LAWYERS
The Human Rights Council this afternoon heard presentations of the reports of the Representative of the Secretary-General on internally displaced persons, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers.
At the beginning of the meeting, the Council concluded its general debate with Louise Arbour, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, after she updated the Council on the work of her Office for the last time before she concludes her four-year term at the end of June.
Walter Kalin, Representative of the Secretary General on the human rights of internally displaced persons, presenting his reports, cited many causes that resulted in people being forced from their homes and countries, such as conflicts, post-conflict situations, the lack of durable solutions for resettling displaced people and those displaced by natural disasters. In past months, he had chosen to focus on people displaced by natural disasters. The disasters in Myanmar and China reminded everyone of the vulnerabilities of populations with regards to natural disasters. Despite the growing attention of internally displaced people by natural disasters, people could not forget that people mainly fled their homes due to armed conflict. He spoke on his reports on the situation in the Central African Republic, Sri Lanka and Azerbaijan.
Philip Alston, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said that his report focused on the role of national commissions of inquiry as a response to allegations of extrajudicial executions. Such inquiries were far too often a façade designed to protect impunity. On his visits to various prisons around the world, he said that the experience had been often shocking. Detainees, sometimes not even charged, were kept in conditions dogs would not be kept in. The Council should act urgently and appoint a Special Rapporteur on the human rights of detainees. He also spoke about his reports on the Philippines, Brazil, the Central African republic, Afghanistan, Nigeria and Sri Lanka.
Leandro Despouy, Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, presenting his report, said that a state of emergency remained the main source of the violation of the right to a fair trial. Access to justice provided the respect of other rights. States had an obligation to guarantee access to justice. Economic barriers had an enormous impact on the access to justice. The impossibility to pay for legal council was affecting many people. Extreme poverty was a problem and constituted a major obstacle to access of justice. Turning to international justice, Mr. Despouy noted the launching of the International Criminal Court. He spoke about the situation in Sudan, Iraq and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Speaking as concerned countries after the presentation of the reports were Azerbaijan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The rest of the concerned countries will address the Council on Tuesday, 3 June.
During the general debate on the High Commissioner’s update at the beginning of the meeting, delegations expressed deep appreciation and utmost respect for the leadership and vision which the High Commissioner had displayed in the last four years. For the Universal Periodic Review to be a credible mechanism leading to actual improvements in human rights, effective follow-up measures were imperative. It was hoped that the constructive and cooperative spirit in which the Universal Periodic Review had been conducted would continue. The establishment of the Office’s policy on country engagement and the steady increase in the number of field offices had left a strong impact on the protection and promotion of human rights for years to come. Also, the independence of the High Commissioner’s Office was a prerequisite for the quality and impartiality of its work.
Speaking at the beginning of the meeting, during the interactive dialogue on the High-Commissioner’s update, were the delegations of the Republic of Korea, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Philippines, Nigeria, Bangladesh, South Africa, the Netherlands, Brazil, the United Kingdom, Burkina Faso, Nepal, Algeria, Chile, Tunisia, Ireland, Morocco, Norway, Argentina, Uzbekistan, Thailand, the Maldives, New Zealand, Ecuador and the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie.
Also speaking were representatives of International Service for Human Rights, speaking on behalf of several NGOs1, Juridical Commission for Auto-Development of First Andean Peoples (CAPAJ); Indian Council of South America; North-South XXI, in a joint statement with Arab Lawyers Union; General Arab Women Federation; and Union of Arab Jurists.
The Council is scheduled to meet again at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 3 when it is scheduled to resume its interactive dialogue on today’s presented reports on the human rights of internally displaced persons, extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the independence of judges and lawyers.
Reports of the Representative of the Secretary-General on the Situation of Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons
The Council has before it the report of the Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights of internally displaced persons, Walter Kalin (A/HRC/8/6 and Add.1-4). [Not available in English]
A first addendum contains the Representative’s findings on his mission to the Central African Republic in 2007. [Not available in English]
The Representative’s report on his mission to Azerbaijan in 2007 is contained in a second addendum, which notes that the Special Envoy’s main objective is to study the situation of internally displaced persons in Azerbaijan, including their rights to have access to education, health services, a livelihood and adequate housing, and to engage in dialogue with the Government to discuss past achievements, pending measures and future plans, not least concerning the eventual return of the displaced. The Government’s recent efforts to provide adequate living conditions to displaced persons in need are welcomed. Given the magnitude of the displacement problem in Azerbaijan, the Representative is impressed with the results already achieved. He is satisfied that the Government takes its responsibilities under international law to fulfil the political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights of internally displaced persons very seriously.
A third addendum contains the findings of the Representative’s mission to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2008. [Not available in English]
The report of the Representative’s mission to Sri Lanka in December 2007, is contained in a fourth addendum which notes that the Representative’s main objective was to engage in dialogue with the Government with a view to improving the protection and ensuring the full enjoyment of the human rights of the estimated 577,000 persons displaced in Sri Lanka. Accordingly, his assessment identifies key obstacles and conditions necessary to enable internally displaced persons in Sri Lanka to find durable solutions. While this mission focused on those displaced by armed conflict and acts of violence, the Representative recalls those displaced by the devastating tsunami of 26 December 2004. In conclusion, the Representative notes that Sri Lanka’s displacement crisis is a challenge because of its size and the range of circumstances in which internally displaced persons live, their immediate needs, and the challenges they face in finding durable solutions.
Presentation by the Representative of the Secretary-General on the Situation of Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons
WALTER KALIN, Representative of the Secretary General on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced People, reported on his activities since March 2007. Ten years ago the Commission on Human Rights had defined principles to guide authorities in dealing with internally displaced peoples during international humanitarian relief efforts. He cited many causes that resulted in people being forced from their homes and countries, such as conflicts, post-conflict situations, the lack of durable solutions for resettling displaced people and those displaced by natural disasters. In past months, he had chosen to focus on people displaced by natural disasters. The disasters in Myanmar and China reminded everyone of the vulnerabilities of populations with regards to natural disasters. In recent months, floods, earthquakes and storms had displaced hundreds of thousands of victims. The experts of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change had suggested that these phenomena were expected to be more frequent in the future. In the past 20 years it was estimated that more than 200 million people had been affected by natural disasters. The most vulnerable were the ones who suffered the most and the impact of disasters were exacerbated by poverty. Attention tended to focus on providing life saving aid of a humanitarian nature. Little attention was paid to the rights of the victim. The Representative said he had developed with the Inter-Agency Standing Committee Operational Guidelines on Human Rights and Natural Disasters and an accompanying manual. While climate change was not displacing people, its manifestation was causing people to flee their homes.
Mr. Kalin stated that despite the growing attention of internally displaced people by natural disasters, people could not forget that people mainly fled their homes due to armed conflict. More than 26 million people had fled from their countries due to conflicts and violence. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, the eastern regions continued to face complex and important protection and humanitarian crisis. New political developments could open new prospects of stability and possible returns for the displaced. A number of challenges still remained before they could see truly durable solutions to the plight of thousands of displaced persons.
In the Central African Republic, recent reports had shown positive initiatives were being taken to end the violence in the north which was the principal cause of displacement of populations in this country. He urged development actors to assist the Government. The root causes of the crisis related to a large extent to poverty and the marginalization of these populations which seemed not to benefit from an equal distribution of resources.
Mr. Kalin said in December 2007 visited Sri Lanka. He noted the efforts of the authorities to provide assistance to the displaced persons, and bore in mind that fighting continued in some regions. A number of challenges remained for these people in particular.
In Azerbaijan, which he visited in April 2007, Mr. Kalin said that the country was still facing serious situations of displacement, but positive steps had been taken by the authorities in bringing assistance to the internally displaced people. He called on the Government to pursue its efforts and to pay particular attention to the plight of the internally displaced persons living in urban settings and the difficulties of displaced persons to gain access to livelihoods in general.
Reports of Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions
The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial summary or arbitrary executions, Philip Alston (A/HRC/8/3 and Add.1-4), which details the principal activities of the Special Rapporteur in 2007 and the first three months of 2008. It also examines in depth three issues of particular importance: the role of national commissions of inquiry in impunity for extrajudicial executions; the right to seek pardon or commutation of a death sentence; and prisoners running prisons. Since he last reported to the Council, the Special Rapporteur has undertaken visits to the Philippines, Brazil and the Central African Republic. In his report, the Special Rapporteur notes that the duty arising under international human rights law to respect and protect life imposes an obligation upon Governments to hold an independent inquiry into deaths where an extrajudicial execution may have taken place. Also, the State’s duty to protect the lives of prisoners is clear. The Special Rapporteur proposes that the Council should appoint a Special Rapporteur on the rights of detainees.
A corrigendum to the report lists States which have so far failed to respond affirmatively to requests for a visit. They are Algeria, Bangladesh, El Salvador, Guinea, India, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Israel, Kenya, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Nepal, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Togo, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam and Yemen.
A first addendum contains a comprehensive account of communications sent to Governments up to 15 March 2008, along with replies received up to the end of April 2008. It also contains responses received to communications that were sent in earlier years.
A second addendum contains the Special Rapporteur’s findings on his 2007 mission to the Philippines, where, since 2001, the number of politically motivated killings has been high and the death toll has mounted steadily. These killings have eliminated civil society leaders, including human rights defenders, trade unionists, and land reform advocates, as well as many others on the left of the political spectrum. Of particular concern is the fact that those killed appear to have been carefully selected and intentionally targeted. The aim has been to intimidate a much larger number of civil society actors, many of whom have, as a result, been placed on notice that the same fate awaits them if they continue their activism. One of the consequences is that the democratic rights that the people of the Philippines fought so hard to assert are under serious threat.
A third addendum report tracks the implementation of recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur following visits to Sri Lanka in 2005 and Nigeria in 2006. The addendum notes that the recommendations made in the Special Rapporteur’s report on Sri Lanka have not been implemented. Recommendations directed to the Government have been all but completely been disregarded, and in most areas there has been significant backward movement. The same is true of recommendations directed to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). It is imperative that the Human Rights Council addresses this crisis. With respect to the recommendations made to Nigeria in January 2006, very little progress has been made. Nigeria has enacted some reforms in partial fulfilment of the Special Rapporteur’s recommendations. For the majority of the recommendations made, Nigeria has failed to make any progress at all. On some issues, the situation has deteriorated.
A preliminary note of the Special Rapporteur’s 2007 mission to Brazil, which is contained in a fourth addendum, notes that many of the types of extrajudicial killings that the Special Raporteur investigated in 2007 have continued in 2008. One issue on which he had focused was killings by police during large-scale policing operations in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro. Cities in Brazil face enormous challenges in keeping their residents safe from the violence of gangs involved in drug trafficking, arms trafficking and other organized crime. A key reason for the ineffectiveness of the police in protecting citizens from these gangs is that they all too often engage in excessive and counterproductive violence while on duty, and participate in what amounts to organized crime when off duty. The police in Brazil clearly operate at significant risk to their lives in many situations. The number of police killed is totally unacceptable and all appropriate lawful measures need to be adopted to prevent such deaths.
A preliminary note of the Special Rapporteur’s mission to the Central African Republic is contained in a fifth addendum. [Currently not available]
A preliminary note of the Special Rapporteur’s mission to Afghanistan is contained in a sixth addendum. [Currently not available]
Presentation by Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions
PHILIP ALSTON, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said that extended analysis in the report focused on the role of national commissions of inquiry as a response to allegations of extrajudicial executions. Empirical study of experience over the past 26 years showed such inquiries were far too often a facade designed to protect impunity. The conclusion was not that they should be shunned in the future but that certain minimum standards must always be met, that international assistance should be provided where appropriate, and that the critical gaze of the human rights community must not be averted simply because an inquiry had been established.
Mr. Alston said his visits to various prisons around the world and the experience had been often shocking indictment of the inhumanity of the systems which many States had put into place. Detainees, who had often not been convicted, sometimes not even charged, were kept in conditions dogs would not be kept in. While many existing Special Procedures mandates - torture, executions, violence against women, health, etc. - touched upon aspects of the problem, they could not do justice to it. The Council should act urgently to appoint a Special Rapporteur on the rights of detainees.
Concerning his visit to the Philippines, Mr. Alston said the report has been thoroughly scrutinized at the national level and invoked by many at the international level. Figures produced by one non-governmental organization, Karapatan, documented a two-thirds drop in the number of extrajudicial killings since the visit. Not a single soldier had yet been convicted and punished for the any of these killings. Despite the improvement, killings continued. Current efforts to reform the criminal justice system would be judged in part on whether the military was subjected to the rule of law. The report also focused on the killing of over 500 persons in the past decade by the “Davao Death Squad”. Most of the victims were suspected of petty crimes, and some were just street kids seen as undesirables.
On his mission to Brazil, Mr. Alston said police accounted for 18 per cent of the killings in the state of Rio in 2007. Rio faced huge problems of drugs, gang violence and general insecurity. Effective policing was chronically needed. Rio’s police killed 25 per cent more people in 2007 than in 2006; almost all of these were categorized as “acts of resistance,” a category which gave the police carte blanche. In other words, Rio’s citizens were less secure and innocent bystanders had been injured and killed in police ‘confrontations’. A strategy based on state-sanctioned extrajudicial killings had failed miserably.
With regard to his trip to the Central African Republic, Mr. Alston said recent developments were encouraging. Four weeks ago a ceasefire agreement was signed between the Government and the APRD. The most urgent challenge for the Government was to extend and institutionalize its efforts to respect human rights and to eliminate impunity.
Concerning his trip to Afghanistan, Mr. Alston said despite the armed conflict, large numbers of avoidable killings of civilians had been tolerated. For the situation to improve police killings must cease, widespread impunity within the legal system for killing must be rejected, the killing of women and girls must end, and the international military forces must ensure real accountability for their actions. International forces reportedly killed as many as 200 civilians, often joint operations with Afghan security forces. The information provided by the international forces enabled neither the average Afghan nor the Council to ascertain how many incidents had been ‘flagged,’ what investigations had been undertaken, or whether any individuals had been punished.
On Nigeria, Mr. Alston said the Government had enacted some reforms in response to the 2006 report. The Government has failed to make sufficient progress or progress at all on a number of other recommendations. Killings by the police remained rampant and impunity reigned supreme.
With regards to Sri Lanka, extrajudicial executions had increased dramatically since his visit at the end of 2005. Given the absence of effective human rights monitoring, reliable statistics were impossible to find. The Government and the LTTE had both engaged in the targeted killing of individuals suspected of collaborating with the other party. Both sides had engaged in shelling that had killed a substantial number of civilians in circumstances that sometimes suggested a failure to respect rules on proportionality and precautions in attack. The Ceasefire Agreement had been terminated, and its monitoring mechanism abolished. The National Human Rights Commission had been stripped of its independence. The Government’s commission of inquiry had failed to provide accountability for extrajudicial executions. Journalists and human rights defenders faced intimidation or death when they tried to promote accountability. The Government had steadfastly and actively opposed any initiative to establish and international human rights monitoring mission. The international community, including the Council had done little in response.
Reports of the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers
The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Leandro Despouy (A/HRC/8/4 and Add.1-2). [Not available in English]
A first addendum reflects specific situations alleged to be affecting the independence of the judiciary or violating the right to a fair trial in 62 countries. Further, it presents any replies received from the Government of the country concerned in response to specific allegations together with the Special Rapporteur’s comments and observations.
A second addendum contains the Special Rapporteur’s findings on his mission to the Republic of the Congo. [Not available in English]
Presentation by the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers
LEANDRO DESPOUY, Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, presenting his report, said that, on the right to a fair trial during a state of emergency, a seminar had taken place in Geneva on this topic last year. Some 15 international experts had met with a view to turning ideas into a single statement to establish international standards in this regard. A state of emergency remained the main source of the violation of the right to a fair trial. On the access of justice, this was a central theme of high importance. It required the attention of Special Procedures. Access to justice provided the respect of other rights. The right to a legal council was also an important right. States had an obligation to guarantee access to justice.
Turning to the barriers to the access to justice, Mr. Despouy noted that economic barriers had an enormous impact on the access to justice. Lack of budget was impeding this right in several countries, as trials had an enormous price. The impossibility to pay for legal council was affecting many people. Extreme poverty was a problem and it constituted a major obstacle to access to justice. Further, many countries made it difficult for someone to be represented by solidarity associations. Economic factors led to social exclusion. Those living in such a situation found themselves in a situation where their rights were not respected.
Cultural barriers including language difficulties constituted another barrier to the enjoyment of these rights. The report also covered the physical barriers encountered, such as the long distances that one had to cover in order to reach a court. The report also looked at special categories of people whose rights were impacted, such as women, indigenous people, migrants and victims of racial discrimination. The special situation of minors was also looked at; they needed special assistance, said Mr. Despouy.
Turning to international justice, Mr. Despouy noted the launching of the International Criminal Court. He was concerned by the lack of cooperation by Sudan. On Iraq, he expressed concern over the High Criminal Court and its use of the death penalty and said that it violated international standards of human rights. The fact that a presumed last terrorist involved in the bombings that had killed Sergio Viera de Mello had been executed was condemned as he could have helped to shed more light on the incident.
Mr. Despouy said that he had conduced visits to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. He had gone to Kinshasa and several other regions and had interviewed several parties. The country was undergoing transition but the number of judges and courts in the country was clearly insufficient. It was frequent for people to have no access to justice. There was a lack of resources available. Also, human rights violations were often being committed by the police forces. With regards to the Maldives, he expressed concern with the detention conditions. A good point was that charges against opposition leaders had been lifted. He also looked forward to visiting the country.
Statements by Concerned Countries
HABIB MIKAYILLI (Azerbaijan), speaking at a concerned country, welcomed the report of Walter Kalin, the Representative of the Secretary-General on the human rights of internally displaced people. Azerbaijan paid tribute to the efforts of Dr. Kalin and his predecessor in raising awareness of the issue. Azerbaijan shared the Representative’s opinion on the need to promote the Guiding Principles and to translate them into the national policies of concerned States. Azerbaijan was satisfied with Dr. Kalin’s discussions with relevant international humanitarian actors, including United Nations agencies as well as regional organizations and other stakeholders. It welcomed the inclusive approach in examining the vulnerable segments displaced as a result of man-made disasters and natural disasters.
Azerbaijan took seriously Dr. Kalin’s recommendations found in the report on Azerbaijan based on his mission in April 2007. It appreciated the constructive and opened ended discussions he had with all relevant stakeholders. Azerbaijan accepted its primary responsibility in tackling internally displaced people related problems stemming from continuing foreign occupation. The efforts by the Government of Azerbaijan aimed at alleviating the suffering of refugees and internally displaced people were considered as one of the best examples by the United Nations. Azerbaijan had pledged several years ago that all tent camps were be liquidated by the end of 2007 and that internally displaced persons would be moved to new settlements, a few that were close to were some displaced persons had originally lived. After Dr. Kalin’s visit, Azerbaijan had adopted Additions to the State Programme on the Improvement of Living Conditions of IDPs and Refugees and their Employment. This document envisaged additional settlements and multiple-story buildings in urban areas, which conformed to some of Dr. Kalin’s recommendations.
Azerbaijan stated that it was fully aware of the problems regarding unemployment of internally displaced people living in new settlements and did its best to address these issues through regional economic development proposals. It reaffirmed its commitment to efforts to improve the living conditions of its citizens who had become internally displaced people.
SEBASTIEN MUTOMB MUJING (Democratic Republic of the Congo), speaking as a concerned country, said that the Democratic Republic of the Congo had paid close attention to the recommendations made by the Representative of the Secretary-General on the human rights of internally displaced persons. The war was a major challenge facing the Government. The Government was responsible for providing protection to displaced persons residing on their territory, however, waiting for help from the United Nations High Commission for Refugees and the scale of the phenomenon made it difficult for the Government to make decisions. The country was faced with post-conflict issues which created more challenges in adequately tackling the issue. An invitation was extended to Walter Kalin to identify the scale of the issue. The Government would like to pay attribute to all the non-governmental organizations which had contributed efforts. At the Goma Peace conference the Government’s hope was to establish solutions for peace and security in the region. Their focus was peace building in the eastern part of country through the use of dialogue, to seek an end to insecurity in that region and end population distribution.
The Special Rappatour visited the country from 15 to 21 April 2008. The Government recently established legitimate institutions and a constitution that guaranteed fundamental principles of human rights and freedoms for their citizens. The country’s history was dominated by authoritative regimes and conflict, and as such the Government recognized the permanent need for the role of justice in ensuring order and law. A draft law was adopted in the national assembly recently. The statue of Rome was considered by the national assembly as well.
Combating impunity and human rights was a priority for the Government; a bill criminalizing torture was submitted to the Council. The Government launched a campaign promoting awareness and providing information about violence against women. The efforts mentioned were all clear demonstrations of the commitment to build a system based on the rule of law through a justice system.
General Debate
LEE SUNG-JOO (Republic of Korea) expressed deep appreciation and utmost respect for the leadership and vision which the High Commissioner had displayed in the last four years. A great deal had been accomplished. This had been a revolutionary period for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the United Nations system as a whole. OHCHR had made considerable progress under her leadership. The Universal Periodic Review was the key determinant in whether the Human Rights Council represented an improvement over the former Commission. For the Universal Periodic Review to be a credible mechanism leading to actual improvements in human rights, effective follow-up measures were imperative. The participation of all relevant stakeholders in this process was strongly encouraged. While the Republic of Korea believed reaching consensus in the work of the Council was desirable, they also shared the High Commissioner’s concerns over the negative aspects that could arise in the course of the pursuit of consensus.
The Republic of Korea had also repeatedly expressed its strong support for a broader field presence of OHCHR. This would enhance the Office’s capacity in terms of enhancing human rights protection and promotion. The situation throughout the world called for additional field presence. The planned regional office for Central Asia was welcomed. On the relation between OHCHR and the Human Rights Council, it was believed that the independence and the integrity of the Office as a part of the United Nations Secretariat had to be respected. The efforts to enhance equitable geographical representation in the composition of the Office were welcomed, but the current situation was still a source of concern.
RAJIVA WIJESINHA (Sri Lanka) expressed Sri Lanka’s sympathies to the people of China and Myanmar. Assistance provided by Sri Lanka was prompted by the fact that this was the duty of governments, as mentioned by the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Sri Lanka wished the High Commissioner well for her future and thanked her Office and various other mechanisms which worked in association with the Office for the advice and assistance they provided. The establishment of the Universal Periodic Review demonstrated the international commitment to a comprehensive approach. Support for balance in reporting to ensure less restricted perspective of the world at large was expressed.
Sri Lanka was particularly perturbed about the suggestion that recent attacks made against Roma settlements represented a policy in Italy, which may have arisen from careless drafting. Sri Lanka had benefited from Italy encouraging migration, and welcoming workers from Sri Lanka in a non-racist approach that they wished was replicated elsewhere. Sri Lanka expressed its gratitude to the two Special Procedures that visited Sri Lanka during the last year. They had presented helpful reports. The spirit of engagement should never be abandoned.
KARIM MOHD YUSOF (Malaysia) thanked the High Commissioner for Human Rights for her commitment and dedication and for her statement. The contribution of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) was crucial to the work of the Universal Periodic Review’s Working Group during the two meetings in April and May. Malaysia looked forward to a further strengthened and streamlined interrelationship between the Human Rights Council and OHCHR based on their institutional foundations, believing that it was essential for a clear and cohesive approach towards human rights promotion and protection world wide. One critical element in this regard was the Human Rights Council’s oversight of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Strategic Framework and Malaysia looked forward to the circulation of this document. Malaysia appreciated the continued emphasis by the High Commissioner for Human Rights for a unified approach to the interdependence of all human rights. The right of development, Malaysia stated, could not be overemphasized, as economic development was an essential prerequisite to the enjoyment of all human rights. Finally, Malaysia stated that there were numerous challenges that required constant vigilance and active response, such as the defamation of religions, and incitement to racial religious hatred. Malaysia agreed with the High Commissioner for Human Rights that a better understanding of the permissible limitations to freedom of expression must be developed.
ERLINDA F. BASILIO (Philippines) thanked the High Commissioner for her outstanding tenure. She had worked very hard in the past four years. Her leadership had come at a critical time of reform of the United Nations human rights system, with the establishment of the Council. Only when States were working closely together in concerted partnership could human rights promotion be truly effective. As one of the first countries to undergo the Universal Periodic Review, the Philippines shared the High Commissioner’s positive assessment about the impact and value of the new mechanism. The Philippines hoped that the constructive and cooperative spirit in which the Universal Periodic Review had been conducted would continue. The High Commissioner’s concerns on the situation of migrants and women were shared. These remained key areas of interest for the Philippines. The convening of the Council’s first thematic Special Session was welcomed. Poverty remained one of the greatest challenges to the full realization of human rights. Countries hit by large-scale natural disasters needed special assistance, and the international community had to take into account their urgent and special needs in this regard.
MARTIN IHOEGHIAN UHOMOIBHI (Nigeria) commended the High Commissioner for Human Rights for her dedication and for her Office which continued to provide strong support for the work of human rights. Nigeria shared the optimism on and significance of the Universal Periodic Review. The effectiveness of the review mechanism would depend largely on the commitment of States to advance the process. There was great confidence in the Special Procedures mechanism as an invaluable tool in advancing common objective to promote and defend human rights. The review, rationalization and improvement of mandates had been conducted with satisfaction. The Council should continue to study all options available on the table with a view to establish new mandates necessary to fill identified gaps. Flexibility, open-mindedness and dynamism should be guiding principles in the collective effort in this direction, to protect and promote human rights and fundamental freedoms.
MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh) thanked the High Commissioner for Human Rights for her statement and views and expressed gratitude for her efforts and work. Bangladesh acknowledged the work done by the High Commissioner in bringing her Office and the Human Rights Council closer together. Bangladesh welcomed the suggestion of the High Commissioner to demarcate the legal contours between the freedom of expression and hate speech, particularity in relation to religion. It was moved by the support which the High Commissioner had shown for the Optional Protocol to the Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Bangladesh echoed the confidence of the High Commissioner in the Universal Periodic Review mechanism as it had the potential to change the culture in dealing with human rights issues. Bangladesh commended the High Commissioner for voicing the position that it was the right of victims of natural disasters to expect humanitarian assistance. Bangladesh stated that there were two omissions in the statement by the High Commissioner for Human Rights when it came to human rights: poverty and the negative impacts of climate change.
GLAUDINE J. MTSHALI (South Africa) said that the Council’s first thematic Special Session in the context of the global food crisis had ensured that the human rights dimension of this problem remained at the core of the Council. South Africa was pleased to note that greater prominence was being accorded to economic, social and cultural rights in the Council. One of the main achievements of the Council this year was the implementation of the Universal Periodic Review. South Africa had been one of the first States to be reviewed. In general during the review, some countries had focused on economic, social and cultural rights, while others had focused primarily on political and civil rights. South Africa recalled that the Vienna Declaration stated that all human rights were universal, indivisible and interdependent and the international community was called to treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner. South Africa had also condemned the violent attacks in their country on people from other countries. They were resolved to bring the full weight of the law on those who had perpetrated these criminal acts. South Africa could not allow a few individuals to reverse and undermine their historical achievements.
BOUDEWIJN J. VAN EENENNAAM (Netherlands) expressed gratitude to the High Commissioner for Human Rights for all that had been achieved during her term. The results achieved were highly appreciated during sometimes difficult circumstances. The establishment of the Office’s policy on country engagement and the steady increase in the number of field offices had left a strong impact on the protection and promotion of human rights for years to come. The independence of the High Commissioner’s Office was a prerequisite for the quality and impartiality of its work. The Netherlands rejected the suggestion that had been made by other delegations that the High Commissioner’s Office should be accountable to the Council or follow its instructions. The discussion should take place in New York to avoid breach of the authority of the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the General Assembly.
MARCIA MARIA ADORNO C. RAMOS (Brazil) thanked the High Commissioner for Human Rights for her presentation to the Council and for her work and efforts during her tenure as well as for her journey to Brazil last December. Brazil agreed with the view of the High Commissioner that the Universal Periodic Review and the treaty bodies should work together to strengthen the United Nations human rights system. Brazil committed itself to the activities regarding the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration for Human Rights. Brazil commended the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the support and focus on the national protection systems. It welcomed the priority that the High Commissioner had shown to the fight against hunger and poverty and to a human rights approach to poverty reduction strategies. Brazil would host in June the Regional Conference for the preparation of the Durbin Review Conference and it thanked the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the assistance in developing the Conference. The Human Rights Council was also reminded that Brazil would host the third annual World Congress against Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adolescents in November.
PETER GOODERHAM (United Kingdom) said that the High Commissioner had presided over her Office that had expanded both in size and in the quality of its output. She had earned the respect of all for her tireless pursuit to see ordinary people better able to exercise their human rights. Her energy, dynamism and personal standing were a loss to the United Nations and human rights community as a whole. Careful consideration would be given to her proposal for the Council to increase its focus on gender-based discrimination. The United Kingdom believed freedom of expression to be a vital component of any society that wished to promote and protect human rights. It was at the heart of the international human rights framework and a key building block of democracy. On Somalia, the United Kingdom as President of the Security Council had called for a resolution on Somalia which called for greater coordination of international efforts. It was important that the Council heard from a range of different sources about situations on the ground. The Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights and the High Commissioner were a valuable source of information.
PROSPER VOKOUMA (Burkina Faso) congratulated the High Commissioner for her efforts and achievements during her term of office. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) was created 15 years ago to help efforts in work on human rights. Burkina Faso was pleased with the achievements in the period considered, and those related to the expansion of the Office’s presence in the field, specifically in Dakar. Resources should be allocated to ensure effectiveness in the area. With the creation of the Universal Periodic Review, the High Commissioner owed it to OHCHR to continue support to the States that had expressed needs for resources. The work of the Universal Periodic Review and the African mechanism for evaluation should continue as major efforts to protect and promote human rights.
DINESH BHATTARAI (Nepal) said on May 28, Nepal was declared a federal democratic republic, which brought to an end the 240 year old monarchy. Nepal reminded the Human Rights Council that the peace process begun in 2006 had demonstrated Nepali leaders’ rare inclination, courage and commitment towards negotiation, tolerance towards dissenting voices and respect for minorities’ views. This had resulted in the culture in the country to resolve all problems through talks and dialogue and to consult with people whenever needed. The Constituent Assembly election was a major milestone in the peace process. The Assembly was an exemplary mix of eminent personalities who had long fought for human rights. Nepal was set on a firm course towards peace, democracy and development to create a better environment and infrastructure on the ground for the respect of human rights and their promotion and protection at all times. It believed in the indivisibility of all rights, civil and political as well as economic, social and cultural rights.
IDRISS JAZAIRY (Algeria) expressed deep appreciation to the High Commissioner for Human Rights for her work for the United Nations human rights machinery. Algeria hoped that the geographic distribution of staff inside the Office would soon be redressed with regard to the African representation. The High Commissioner’s view on thematic special sessions which were bringing out the interdependence and complementarities between civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights was shared. The Office’s continuous support to the Durban Preparatory Committee was welcomed. Algeria hoped that the review would provide an opportunity to assess implementation gaps and devise the required set of actions to forcefully and collectively combat emerging new forms of racial discrimination. Algeria requested clarification about the creation of an inquiry procedure through an Optional Protocol to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination on early warning about situations degenerating into genocide. With regard to the planned regional office for North Africa, Algeria believed that the expansion of field presence should involve prior consultation of the Council.
CARLOS PORTALES (Chile) expressed thanks to the High Commissioner for her work and dedication. The Universal Periodic Review was extremely important and the scrutiny of standards and rights was universally important. Chile applauded the process, especially the High Commissioner’s efforts to include special bodies and non-governmental organizations. This did not replace the Council’s need to act in emergency situations. The efforts of the Council were needed for ongoing violations of human rights. Chile attached importance to the Council’s fight against discrimination, which would be further discussed at the Durban Review conference. The work had been conducted in a constructive way with a view to eliminating of all forms of discrimination, especially against women.
Preventing violence against women and improving the alarming situation of migrants in regions of the world went hand in hand with prejudices, and the international community should play a role in improving this situation. Chile commended the High Commissioner for her courage and for the independence of her Office.
ALI CHERIF (Tunisia) aligned itself with the statements of Egypt on behalf of the African Group and Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The High Commissioner for Human Rights was thanked for her statement and her efforts during her tenure. The Universal Periodic Review was an essential part of human rights development and a milestone of the Human Rights Council in recognizing the dignity of all. Tunisia believed that the Universal Periodic Review, under which it had been among the first countries to be examined, was a very important tool to evaluate the situation of human rights and to help States detect lacunae in their protection systems.
MICHEAL TIERNEY (Ireland) congratulated the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the way she had been working to protect human rights. Ireland was the third biggest donor country to the Office. Their experience with the conflict in their country had pushed them to engage in the Office’s work. In situations where there was a deep rift between people, the principles of human rights gave guarantees of justice and equality for all. Ireland was convinced that the expert technical work done by the Office’s staff had to be carried out without interference. The independence of the Office was important for it to conduct its mission successfully. It was action and not the fruit of action which counted. The High Commissioner had earned their respect.
MOHAMMED LOULICHKI (Morocco) expressed thanks to the High Commissioner for Human Rights for her guidance, efforts and integrity throughout her term, especially for her help with the work of the Universal Periodic Review. The Universal Periodic Review could be more effective in a number of areas already identified. Morocco agreed with the High Commissioner on the necessity to permissible limitations to the freedom of expression to determine the limits of freedom of expression and expressions of hate, defamation and intolerance. The world food crisis reminded all of the demand of basic rights of health and food, and placing these rights on par with political and civil rights was imperative. Morocco wished the High Commissioner the best for the future and hoped the efforts she had established continued to reflect international action, going beyond fear and meeting needs.
HILDE SKORPEN (Norway) called the High Commissioner for Human Rights a devoted and courageous advocate for human rights for all. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had been strengthened, the funding had been increased, and the promotion of human rights had become a core objective of the whole United Nations system. Norway noted attempts to weaken the independence and integrity of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Norway reconfirmed its obligation to respect, promote and protect the human rights of all individuals and stated the importance to ensure that the Human Rights Council became a success, making a difference to people all over the world. It asked for the advice of the High Commissioner in what Member States could do to better assist the role of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
ALBERTO J. DUMONT (Argentina) highlighted and expressed Argentina’s appreciation for the work of the High Commissioner for Human Rights during the last four years. The work of her Office had been very important for the protection of human rights. The support given on the ground by the regional offices, the support given to the Council and the particular attention given to the fight against impunity, transitional justice, and discrimination in all its forms were some of the remarkable achievements of the Office. As the High Commissioner had said it was important to strengthen the Universal Periodic Review mechanism. Argentina believed that the work of her successor should continue under the same premises.
BADRIDDIN OBIDOV (Uzbekistan) said that Uzbekistan supported the Secretary-General in declaring a day of human rights and had sought to coordinate such a day within their country. It was important to have a fast approach to human rights issues and it was agreed that regional representation was needed. All States should agree through consensus with respect to representative offices in South East Asia. It was important to note that the two centres being discussed should have consensus from all Member States for effective functionality in the region. Uzbekistan agreed with proposals to discuss and consider the strategic activities and issues of opening regional offices.
LADA PHUMAS (Thailand) thanked the High Commissioner for Human Rights for her efforts and dedication. Thailand was pleased with the outcome of the seventh Special Session of the Council on the global food crisis. Thailand placed great importance on the issue of food security and strengthening international cooperation to resolve the current global food crisis. It believed that food security and human security were interrelated. Thailand had made significant progress in achieving the development goals under the Millennium Development Goals directly linked to human security. It paid particular attention to MDG-8 on the promotion of a global partnership for development.
It recognized the challenges of the threat of natural disasters and expressed its condolences to the Governments of the People’s Republic of China and Myanmar. Thailand was particularly pleased to see the cooperation between the Government of Myanmar and the international community in assisting the victims of Cyclone Nargis, especially the ASEAN-UN Partnership.
ABDUL GHAFOOR MOHAMED (Maldives) said that the Maldives shared the High Commissioner’s view that the Universal Periodic Review process was vitally important for the promotion and protection of human rights around the world. The Maldives had been heartened by the constructive and cooperative spirit in which the first group of reviews had been undertaken. This certainly bode well for the future. The success of the Universal Periodic Review would be judged by the degree to which recommendations were taken onboard and acted upon on the ground. Freedom of expression, when properly protected and sensibly enjoyed was an extremely powerful means of reducing hate and misunderstanding. Yet, when used irresponsibly it had the potential to polarize and create fear. The High Commissioner was thanked for her tireless efforts to strengthen the enjoyment of human rights.
DON MACKAY (New Zealand) expressed New Zealand’s appreciation for the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ leadership and commitment for defending fundamental human rights, especially when Governments had taken too long to act and respond. The frank and objective manner in which the High Commissioner highlighted human rights violations demonstrated what could be achieved at a high level. New Zealand also appreciated the momentum on existing issues and Ms. Arbour’s use of the High Commissioner’s independent mandate to push and highlight reform on a number of other important issues. The High Commissioner’s guidance of field officers in a number of States, such as Somalia and Kenya, was admirable. New Zealand further expressed appreciation for the High Commissioner’s support on human rights in the negotiation of the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities.
JUAN HOLGUIN (Ecuador) expressed gratitude for the report by the High Commissioner for Human Rights and congratulated her for her efforts on strengthening the Human Rights Council and the rights for all human beings. Ecuador was concerned about the High Commissioner’s statement on attitudes of countries towards migration of people and reminded the Human Rights Council that it was not long ago that many migrated to Ecuador and were welcomed in the spirit of brotherhood.
LIBERE BARARUNYERETSE, of the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, paid tribute to the High Commissioner for the ongoing commitment she had shown throughout her term for the promotion and protection of human rights in the world. She had shown a remarkable professionalism. Her actions were based on an ethical system that was a fundamental belief in humanity and in the dignity of every person. One had to recognize that during her term of office, she had provided vital and necessary support during creation and throughout the first years of Council. The cooperation with the Organisation Internationale de la Francophone was also welcomed. The High Commissioner was further thanked for all her actions and for her availability to the Francophone world.
ISABELLE SCHERER, of International Service for Human Rights, speaking on behalf of several NGOs1, commended the High Commissioner for her strong personal commitment to strengthening the international human rights system and to the fundamental principle of universality and interdependence of human rights, which was demonstrated through her outstanding leadership as a human rights advocate. Her vision and dedication had increased momentum towards achieving the common goal of the full implementation of human rights standards.
The High Commissioner’s leadership and the profile of human rights as one of the fundamental pillars of the United Nations and of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights as a crucial part of the United Nations Secretariat had been raised. Ms. Arbour’s work to consolidate her Office’s protection and technical cooperation mandates was of essence. The establishment of national protection systems through country engagement strategies was significant to the Office.
JORGE TAFUR, of Juridical Commission for Auto-Development of First Andean Peoples (CAPAJ), said that the right to food was essential. The economic and social situation of populations was becoming extremely precarious. The true discovery of America was happening now with the recognition of the human rights of the Peublos Originarious Aninos. The Juridicial Commission was working zealously to document and denounce non-compliance with human rights standards in the field. It came to the Human Rights Council to recognize the work of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in attending the claims and to listen and grapple with the problems of the communities.
RONALD BARNES, of the Indian Council of South America, commended the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the work she had achieved during her term. The Indian Council agreed that the Universal Periodic Review would be enhanced by the addition of an Independent Expert and a more structured follow-up mechanism. The existing draft of the Optional Protocol to the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights would deliberately exclude the consideration in the communications to hear violation of indigenous group rights. This was evidence of politization and selectivity in the area of standard setting activity. It would inevitably create an historic imbalance for the economic, social and cultural rights of ingenuous people. It was unacceptable. The exclusion of indigenous people and colonized people simply gave the colonizers the free reign.
CURTIS DOEBBLER, of North-South XXI, in a joint statement with Arab Lawyers Union; General Arab Women Federation; and Union of Arab Jurists, expressed appreciation for the efforts of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to lead efforts in the field of human rights. The human rights situation in Iraq had not been given the focus within the Council that it deserved. The situation in Iraq was one of the most serious in the world today and should be addressed. North South XXI further expressed appreciation for Ms. Arbour’s efforts in establishing reviews and mechanisms to protect and promote human rights. The Durban Review conference was of specific importance as it addressed the issue of combating all forms of racial discrimination.
__________
1Joint statement on behalf of: International Service for Human Rights; Action Canada for Population and Development; Amnesty International; Asian Legal Resource Centre; Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA); Association for the Prevention of Torture; Baha'i International Community; Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies; Canadian HIV/Aids Legal Network; Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions; Colombian Commission of Jurists; Conectas Direitos Humanos; Franciscans International; Friends World Committee for Consultation (Quakers); Human Rights Watch; International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development (Rights and Democracy); International Commission of Jurists; International Federation of Human Rights Leagues (FIDH); Latin American Committee for the Defence of Women's Rights (CLADEM); Lutheran World Federation; and Pax Romana.
For use of the information media; not an official record
HRC08055E