HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL ADOPTS 19 TEXTS ON VARIOUS ISSUES

The Human Rights Council this morning adopted 16 resolutions, two decisions and one presidential statement on a number of issues, including on missing persons, human rights and international solidarity, human rights and unilateral coercive measures, human rights of migrants, the world food crisis, human rights and indigenous peoples, effective implementation of international human rights instruments, protection of the human rights of civilians in armed conflict, human rights and transitional justice, the right to truth, human rights voluntary goals and guidelines on alternative care for children. The texts included extending the mandates of the Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the movement and dumping of toxic products and wastes, the Working Group on the Right to Development and its Task Force, the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Haiti, and the Special Procedure for Cambodia.

The Council also appointed the following Special Procedure mandate holders: Ms. Monorama Biswas (Bangladesh) to the Working Group on People of African Descent; Ms. Mirjana Najcevska (The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) to the Working Group on People of African Descent; Mr. Olivier de Frouville (France) to the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances; Ms. Catarina de Albuquerque (Portugal) as Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation.

Among other action, the Council requested the Advisory Committee to prepare a study on best practices in the matter of missing persons and decided to convene a one-day session to commemorate the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to be held during the week of 8 December 2008.

At the beginning of the meeting, Kyung-Wha Kang, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, presented a report on conference facilities and financial support to the Human Rights Council.

With regard to extensions of mandates, the Council extended the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the movement and dumping of toxic products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights for a further period of three years. It urged the Special Rapporteur to continue to undertake a global, multidisciplinary and comprehensive study of existing problems, new trends and solutions to the adverse effects of the trafficking and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on human rights, in particular in developing countries, as well as in those sharing borders with developed countries.

The Council renewed the mandate of the Working Group on the Right to Development until it completed the tasks entrusted to it by Council and also renewed the mandate of the high-level Task Force on the implementation of the right to development.

The mandate of Working Group of Experts on People of African descent was extended for three years to study the problems of racial discrimination faced by people of African descent living in the Diaspora.

In a Presidential Statement on the situation of human rights in Haiti, the Council welcomed the Haitian authorities’ request to extend the mission of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Haiti to September 2010 and decided to support the request. Haiti spoke as a concerned country.

On advisory services and technical assistance for Cambodia, the Council decided to extend by one year the mandate of the Special Procedure on the situation of human rights in Cambodia through the appointment of a Special Rapporteur to carry out the former functions of the Special Representative to the Secretary-General. Cambodia spoke as a concerned country.

Two texts were adopted by a vote. The Council adopted, by a vote of 33 in favour and 13 against, a resolution on human rights and international solidarity in which it urged the international community to urgently consider concrete measures to promote and consolidate international assistance to developing countries in their development endeavours.

The Council also adopted, by a vote of 33 in favour, 11 against and 2 abstentions, a resolution on human rights and unilateral coercive measures in which it condemned the continued unilateral application and enforcement by certain powers of unilateral coercive measures as tools of political or economic pressure against any country, particularly against developing countries.

On the human rights of migrants, the Council strongly condemned the manifestations and acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance against migrants. It urged States to apply the existing laws when xenophobic or intolerant acts against migrants occurred in order to eradicate impunity.

The Council adopted a resolution on the follow-up to the seventh special session of the Human Rights Council on the negative impact of the worsening of the world food crisis on the realization of the right to food for all, and expressed grave concern at the fact that the current world food crisis still seriously undermined the realization of the right to food for all. The Council stressed that States had a primary obligation to make their best efforts to meet the vital food needs of their own populations, while the international community should provide support for national and regional efforts by providing the necessary assistance for increasing food production.

The Council adopted a resolution on the human rights and indigenous peoples and requested the expert mechanism on the rights of indigenous peoples to identify proposals and to suggest them to the Council for its consideration in 2009. It also requested the expert mechanism to prepare a study on lessons learned and challenges to achieve the implementation of the right of indigenous peoples to education.

Speaking to introduce the resolutions, or in a general comment or in an explanation of the vote before the vote, or in an explanation of the vote after the vote were Egypt, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Côte d’Ivoire, France, India, Canada, Cuba, Mexico, Guatemala, Switzerland, Argentina, Brazil, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Russian Federation, Japan, South Africa and Japan.

The Council will resume its meeting at 3 p.m. this afternoon to continue to take action on draft resolutions and decisions before it concludes its ninth regular session.


Document on Conference Facilities and Financial Support to the Human Rights Council

The Council has before it the report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on conference facilities and financial support for the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/9/18), submitted in response to Council resolution 8/1 which requested OHCHR and Conference Services to assess the situation concerning delays in submission of documents to the Council, and in particular the delays in the translation of documents into the six official UN languages and to make recommendations. Chapter I provides this assessment and recommendations. The Council also requested the Department of Public Information to make an assessment of the situation pursuant to the Council’s affirmation that it would consider favourably the adoption of a decision on the webcasting of all public proceedings of its various working groups. Chapter II of this report presents the assessment of the Department of Public Information on the overall requirements for its services in respect of the Council and its machinery, including press and all media coverage. Among others, the report concludes that it is “an unassailable fact that the demand for conference services for the Human Rights Council and its machinery is growing” and that the current Conference Management document-processing capacity cannot meet the documentation requirements of the Council and its subsidiary machinery. The Council also requires significantly more media services than its predecessor body. Webcasting has been identified by the Council as a vital component in communication about its role and functioning. In order to provide these services, the Department of Public Information will require additional infrastructure and related staff.

Statement on Conference Facilities and Financial Support to the Human Rights Council

KYUNG-WHA KANG, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, presenting the report on conference facilities and financial support to the Human Rights Council, said that the establishment and full functioning of the Human Rights Council had generated an enormous quantity of work for all involved in supporting its activities. The challenge of the increased volume of activities and related documentation was greatly amplified by issues of timing and scheduling, with the Council, its Working Group and Committees, and the growing number of Treaty Bodies all meeting more frequently, virtually without gaps over the course of the year. Similarly, a growing interest among Member States, civil society and other stakeholders in following the proceedings of the Council and its Working Group through the medium of webcasts, both live and in their archived form, had placed hugely expanded demands on the small Geneva Information Service, which had to support all United Nations Secretariat activities in its main European Headquarters.

Ms. Kang said that the report presented a joint effort between the offices concerned, with the common goal of improving the delivery of services to the Council and its mechanisms. The report provided an overview of the documentation requirements and additional human rights conference activities generated by new mandates, and analyzed the issues affecting the ability of the Division of conference management to provided theses services. The report also reviewed the increased responsibilities of the Information Service and the unbridgeable gap between those demands and the available resources.

Action on Draft Resolution under Organizational and Procedural Matters

AMR ROSHDY HASSAN (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the African Group and introducing the draft resolution A/HRC/9/L.1 on security arrangements for the Human Rights Council, said that the resolution had been introduced to draw attention to something that was happening in the Council and that they felt was in violation of the Vienna Convention. In order to make use of the President’s good offices, the African Group would defer the draft resolution until the next session.

Action on Draft Resolutions and Decisions under the Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights

Draft Resolution on the Holodomor

MYKOLA MAIMESKUL (Ukraine) explained why the draft resolution on the remembrance of the Holodomor of 1932 and 1933 in Ukraine was withdrawn. Ukraine believed that the tragedy should eternally remain in the past and should never again happen in any other part of the world. Ukraine had hoped to find consensus and when it found out that consensus could not be reached, it did its best to find achieve compromise. Ukraine thanked delegations for their cooperation, especially those who had decided to become co-sponsors, such as Georgia, Estonia, Latvia and others. As the issue of the Holodomor was being considered in other international fora, the Ukrainian delegation had decided to withdraw this draft.

Decision on Missing Persons

In a decision (A/HRC/9/L.5) on missing persons, adopted without a vote, the Council requests the Advisory Committee to prepare a study on the best practices in the matter of missing persons and to submit that study to the Council at its twelfth session.

ELCHIN AMIRBAYOV (Azerbaijan), introducing draft decision A/HRC/9/L.5 on missing persons, said that the previous Human Rights Council resolution had provided for a panel discussion on missing persons during the ninth session of the Human Rights Council. Azerbaijan thanked all the participants in the panel that had taken place on 22 May. The panel had generated a lot of interesting ideas and had laid ground for the follow up. Azerbaijan looked forward to the summary of the deliberations to be prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. In line with the previous resolution, the Council tasked the Advisory Committee to prepare a compilation of best practices while dealing with missing persons. The decision formally requested the Advisory Committee to commence the work on this study and Azerbaijan appealed to all members of the Council to adopt the document of the draft resolution without the vote.

Resolution on Mandate of Special Rapporteur on Dumping of Toxic and Dangerous Products and Wastes

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.3) on the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council strongly condemns the dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes; decides to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights for a further period of three years; and urges the Special Rapporteur to continue to undertake a global, multidisciplinary and comprehensive study of existing problems, new trends and solutions to the adverse effects of the trafficking and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on human rights, in particular in developing countries, as well as in those sharing borders with developed countries.

The Council also invites the Special Rapporteur to include in his report to the Council comprehensive information, inter alia, on persons killed, maimed or otherwise injured in developing countries by the movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes; human rights standards applicable to transnational corporations and other business enterprises that dump toxic and dangerous products and wastes; and the question of rehabilitation of and assistance to victims. The Council reiterates its call to the Secretary-General to continue to make all necessary resources available to the Special Rapporteur so that he may carry out his mandate successfully and, in particular provide him, inter alia, with adequate financial and human resources; and decides to continue consideration of the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights under the same agenda item in 2011, in accordance with its annual of programme of work.

NIANGORAN KABLAN ALAIN PORQUET (Côte d’Ivoire), speaking on behalf of the African Group, introducing the draft resolution on the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights, said that the draft resolution aimed to reinforce the mandate in order that all the contexts in which those could violate human rights would be taken into account. There was a need to reinforce this mandate. The draft resolution wanted to highlight the dangerous effects of the movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes, better protection of the population, and strengthen legislation and adequate finances, technical and human resources to carry out the mandate objectively.

JEAN -BAPTISTE MATTEI (France), speaking on behalf of the European Union in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said the European Union had the feeling that the draft resolution covered the same issues as previous resolutions. France thanked Côte d’Ivoire for the consultations and suggestions given. The European Union was concerned about the adverse effects of toxic waste and understood the concern of African countries about their negative impact on human rights. France, together with European Union, was committed to dealing with the issue. Member States of the European Union had already tried to ban the movement of toxic wastes and products.

MUNU MAHAWAR (India), in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that India had previously supported the extension of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights, and was supporting it again. However, given the technicalities, it was not realistic to undertake a comprehensive study on all aspects. India felt that in practice, the mandate should focus on illicit movement.

JOHANNE FOREST (Canada), in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that Canada would not block the consensus on the resolution, but they still continued to have concerns with the extension of the mandate. The access to safe drinking water risked creating confusion on the existence and scope of a right to safe drinking water and sanitation. No such right existed currently. The mandate could also further create confusion with other mandates, such as the Basel Convention. There were serious risks of duplication of work.

Decision on Commemorative Session on Sixtieth Anniversary of Universal Declaration of Human Rights

In a presidential decision (A/HRC/9/L.6) on a commemorative session on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to convene a one-day session to commemorate the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to be held during the week of 8 December 2008. It will be an opportunity to present national, regional and international initiatives launched on the occasion of the anniversary. The Council invites the Secretary-General and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to address the Council.

Resolution on Human Rights and International Solidarity

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.7) on human rights and international solidarity, adopted by a vote of 33 in favour, 13 against, and no abstentions, the Council reaffirms the recognition set forth in the declaration adopted by the Heads of State and Government at the Millennium Summit of the United Nations of the fundamental value of solidarity to international relations in the twenty-first century, in stating that global challenges must be managed in a way that distributes costs and burdens fairly, in accordance with basic principles of equity and social justice, and that those who suffer, or who benefit least, deserve help from those who benefit most. The Council expresses its determination to contribute to the solution of current world problems through increased international cooperation; urges the international community to consider urgently concrete measures to promote and consolidate international assistance to developing countries in their development endeavours and for the promotion of conditions conducive to the full realization of all human rights; reaffirms that the promotion of international cooperation is a duty for States, and that it shall be implemented in particular with the respect for the sovereignty of States and taking into account national priorities; recognizes that the so-called “third-generation rights” closely interrelated with the fundamental value of solidarity need further progressive development within the United Nations human rights machinery in order to be able to respond to the increasing challenges of international cooperation in this field; and requests all States, United Nations agencies, other relevant international organizations and non governmental organizations to mainstream the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity in their activities, and to cooperate with the Independent Expert in his mandate.

The result of the vote was as follows:

In favour (33): Angola, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Uruguay and Zambia.

Against (13): Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine and United Kingdom.

MIRTA GRANDA AVERHOFF (Cuba), introducing the draft resolution on human rights and international solidarity, thanked the countries that gave their support and sponsorship to the resolution. The draft resolution reaffirmed the right of all people to establish a social and international order for the best enjoyment of rights as guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The resolution also highlighted the responsibility for social and economic development and solidarity links between generations to perpetuate humanity. Among new elements included in the resolution this year was the promotion of international cooperation without any conditionality and on the basis of mutual respect, particularly for sovereignty of States and according to national priorities. There was also a request to the Independent Expert to continue with the preparation of a draft declaration on international solidarity and to submit a report to the Human Rights Council. Cuba called on Member States to vote in favour of this draft resolution and ensure the widest possible approval.

JEAN -BAPTISTE MATTEI (France), speaking on behalf of the European Union, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said the European Union stressed the importance of international solidarity. The European Union believed that the international community had to act in solidarity with those who suffered from extreme poverty. There was a moral imperative to solidarity and the main objective of the European Union was to eradicate poverty. However, the European Union was convinced that States should shoulder the prime responsibility to protect and promote human rights. Therefore the European Union could not approve the formulation that international solidarity depended on the international community. Human rights implied legal obligations and international solidarity did not imply legal obligations. It should be possible to clearly determine the beneficiaries of rights. The European Union had not been able to support similar earlier drafts and mandates, and called on a vote on this one and would vote against it.

Resolution on Right to Development

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.12) on the right to development, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to continue to act to ensure that its agenda promotes and advances sustainable development and the achievements of the Millennium Development Goals and, in this regard, to lead to raising the right to development to the same level and on a par with all other human rights and fundamental freedoms; to endorse the work plan for the task force for the period 2008-2010, which would ensure that the criteria for the periodic evaluation of global partnerships to be submitted by the task force to the Working Group at its eleventh session in 2010, is extended to other components of Millennium Development Goal 8; decides that the above criteria, once considered, revised and endorsed by the Working Group, should be used in the elaboration of a comprehensive and coherent set of standards for the implementation of the right to development; that the Working Group will take appropriate steps to ensure respect for and practical application of these standards; to renew the mandate of the Working Group until it completes the tasks entrusted to it by Council in its resolution 4/4; to renew also the mandate of the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development; and decides to request the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to continue to take all necessary measures and allocate necessary resources for the effective implementation of the present resolution.

RESFEL PINO ALVAREZ (Cuba), speaking on behalf of Non Aligned Movement, introduced the draft resolution on the right to development, which was the result of a broad consultation process. The Non Aligned Movement welcomed and endorsed the conclusions of the Working Group on the Right to Development. Through the adoption of this draft resolution, the Human Rights Council would renew the mandate of the Working Group on the Right to Development and the mandate of the Task Force into 2010. It would also endorse the work plan of the Task Force, which requested the examination of additional issues related to Millennium Development Goal 8. The Non Aligned Movement hoped that the process of the application of the criteria to development partnership would enable their refinement and that the process would establish a firm basis for a declaration on the right to development. Cuba also introduced amendments to the text.

JEAN -BAPTISTE MATTEI (France), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said in a general comment, that the European Union welcomed the work done by the Working Group on the right to development. It reaffirmed the responsibility of States to the right to development.

JEFFREY HEATON (Canada), in a general comment, said Canada supported this resolution as they believed that the high-level Task Force was making an important contribution. However Canada also believed that it was inappropriate to create new legally binding standards. A legally binding instrument was, for them, only one option amongst many others. They would still join the consensus.

Resolution on Human Rights and Unilateral Coercive Measures

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.13) on human rights and unilateral coercive measures, adopted by a vote of 33 in favour, 11 against, and 2 abstentions, the Council urges all States to stop adopting or implementing unilateral coercive measures not in accordance with international law, international humanitarian law, the Charter of the United Nations and the norms and principles governing peaceful relations among States, in particular those of a coercive nature with extraterritorial effects, which create obstacles to trade relations among States, thus impeding the full realization of the rights set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights instruments, in particular the right of individuals and peoples to development. The Council strongly objects to the extraterritorial nature of those measures which threaten the sovereignty of States and calls upon all Member States neither to recognize these measures nor apply them, and to take effective administrative or legislative measures to counteract the extraterritorial application or effects of unilateral coercive measures. It condemns the continued unilateral application and enforcement by certain powers of such measures as tools of political or economic pressure against any country, particularly against developing countries.

The Council reiterates its call upon Member States that have initiated such measures to abide by the principles of international law, the Charter of the United Nations, the declarations of the United Nations and world conferences and relevant resolutions and to commit themselves to their obligations and responsibilities arising from the international human rights instruments to which they are parties by putting an immediate end to such measures; and reaffirms the right of all peoples to self-determination. The Council reaffirms that essential goods, such as food and medicines, should not be used as tools for political coercion and that under no circumstances should people be deprived of their own means of subsistence and development; rejects all attempts to introduce unilateral coercive measures; and requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights to pay due attention and give urgent consideration to the present resolution and request also the Secretary-General to bring the present resolution to the attention of all States Members of the United Nations and to seek their views and information on the implications and negative effects of unilateral coercive measures on their populations, and to submit a report thereon to the Council at its twelfth session.

The result of the vote was as follows:

In favour (33): Angola, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Uruguay and Zambia.

Against (11):Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine and United Kingdom.

Abstentions (3): Bosnia and Herzegovina, Madagascar and Republic of Korea.

RESFEL PINO ALVAREZ (Cuba), speaking on behalf of the Non Aligned Movement, introduced the draft resolution on human rights and unilateral coercive measures. Cuba expressed regret that a specific group of countries had decided to remain outside of the process. The resolution would stop all States applying coercive measures out of line with international law, especially those coercive measures with extraterritorial character, which had negative implications on cooperative relations and enjoyment of human rights. The draft resolution condemned unilateral enforcement as political or economic tools against countries, especially developing ones. As recognised by the Human Rights Council, coercive measures represented one of the obstacles to implementation of the right to development. Cuba called on all States that had initiated such measures to abide by the international law and United Nations Charter and to respect their international obligations.

MARIUS GRINIUS (Canada), in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that Canada had consistently opposed this resolution which condemned unilateral coercive measures. The resolution did not make a difference between unilateral coercive measures such as economic sanctions which were acceptable and those extraterritorial coercive measures which were not acceptable. Canada requested a vote and urged members to vote against.

Resolution on Human Rights of Migrants

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.14) on the human rights of migrants, adopted without a vote, as orally revised, the Council reaffirms the rights set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in this regard strongly condemns the manifestations and acts of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance against migrants and urges States to apply the existing laws when xenophobic or intolerant acts or manifestations or expressions against migrants occur, in order to eradicate impunity; requests States to effectively promote and protect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all migrants regardless of their immigration status; expresses concern about legislation and measures adopted by some States that may restrict human rights and fundamental freedoms; requests States to adopt concrete measures in order to prevent the violation of the human rights of migrants while in transit, including in ports and airports and at borders and migration checkpoints; requests States to prosecute any act of violation of the human rights of migrants and their families; and requests all States firmly to prosecute violations of labour law with regard to migrant workers’ conditions of work.

The Council welcomes the adoption of the resolution WHA61.17 by the World Health Organization on Health of Migrants, and calls upon States to take it into account as a measure for the progressive realization of the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health; encourages States to consider participating in international and regional dialogues on migration and invites them to consider negotiating bilateral and regional agreements on migrant workers in the framework of applicable human rights law; requests Member States, the United Nations system and all relevant stakeholders, especially the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, to ensure that the perspective of the human rights of migrants is included among the priority issues in the ongoing discussions on international migration and development within the United Nations system; and encourages the Special Rapporteur to continue to examine ways and means of overcoming obstacles to the full and effective protection of the human rights of migrants.

SALVADOR TINAJERO (Mexico), introducing the draft resolution on the human rights of migrants, said that the draft was the first integral and substantive one on the human rights of migrants in Geneva since the last Human Rights Council resolution on the subject. The draft resolution paid homage to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on its sixtieth anniversary. The structure of the resolution was related to principles and rights developed in the text of the Universal Declaration: the general responsibility of States, protection of rights and defence of adequate legislation, and protection of vulnerable groups. The format was a reminder that the rights of all people must be respected at all times and where ever they were. It represented the universal reach of human rights. The rights of people were not border-bound. The draft resolution called on States to respect the rights that had been agreed to through other international instruments. The responsibility for human rights that lay with States when elaborating migratory norms must be included in migratory policies.

TERRY CORMIER (Canada), speaking in a general comment, said Canada would join the consensus on this resolution because it attached great importance to the protection of the human rights of migrants. However, regarding the global forum on migration, Canada stressed that it had to remain independent of the United Nations system. Canada believed that inclusion or exclusion of agenda items for the forum had to be up to the so-called friends of the forum.

Action on Resolution on Follow-Up to the Special Session on the World Food Crisis

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.15) on the follow-up to the seventh special session of the Human Rights Council on the negative impact of the worsening of the world food crisis on the realization of the right to food for all, adopted without a vote, the Council expresses grave concern at the fact that the current world food crisis still seriously undermines the realization of the right to food for all, especially in developing and least developed countries; encourages States to mainstream the human rights perspective in building and reviewing their national strategies for the realization of the right to adequate food for all, and to invest or promote investment in agriculture and rural infrastructure in a manner that empowers the most vulnerable and affected by the current crisis; calls upon States to take all necessary measures to ensure the realization of the right to food as an essential human rights objective, and to consider reviewing any policy or measure that could have a negative impact on the realization of the right to food; and stresses that States have a primary obligation to make their best efforts to meet the vital food needs of their own populations, while the international community should provide support for national and regional efforts by providing the necessary assistance for increasing food production, particularly through agricultural development assistance, the transfer of technology, food crop rehabilitation assistance and food aid, with a special focus on the gender-sensitive dimension; encourages all relevant international organizations and agencies to bring to their studies, research, reports and resolutions on the issue of food security a human rights perspective and the need for the realization of the right to food for all.

The Council requests the Special Rapporteur on the right to food to continue the promotion of the right to food and the follow-up to the current world food crisis in all relevant forums, and to report on the implementation of the present resolution to the Council at its twelfth session, including on the progress made and obstacles encountered in relation with the implementation at the national level of the measures and best practices adopted by States to respond to the global food crisis; and requests the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to bring the present resolution to the attention of all relevant international organizations and agencies.

ABEL LA ROSA DOMINGUEZ (Cuba) introduced the draft resolution on the follow up to the seventh Special Session of the Human Rights Council devoted to the negative impact of the worsening of the world food crisis on the realisation of the right to food for all. The draft resolution reaffirmed the commitment of States within the United Nations system to deal with the global food crisis and recognised the complex nature of the problem. It also attempted to see the crisis from the perspective of human rights. States had the primordial responsibility to feed their people, but international cooperation also had to significantly contribute. The Special Rapporteur had enormous responsibility in finding solutions for the problem to ensure the right to food for millions, whose rights were constantly violated.

JEFFREY HEATON (Canada), speaking in a general comment, said that Canada remained deeply concerned about the food crisis and its impact on human rights, but this resolution did not place primary responsibility on the States and their responsibility to respect the right to food. Canada also regretted that the responsibility of States to provide free and unhindered access to humanitarian aid was not provided for in the resolution. Despite this, Canada supported the resolution and joined consensus.

Action on Resolution on Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.17) on human rights and indigenous peoples, adopted without a vote, the Council welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people (A/HRC/9/9) and the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on indigenous issues (A/HRC/9/11); requests the expert mechanism on the rights of indigenous peoples to identify proposals and to suggest them by consensus to the Council, for its consideration in 2009; also requests the expert mechanism and the Special Rapporteur to assist the Preparatory Committee by undertaking a review and submitting recommendations as contributions to the outcome of the Durban Review Conference; further requests the expert mechanism to prepare a study on lessons learned and challenges to achieve the implementation of the right of indigenous peoples to education and to conclude it in 2009; requests the expert mechanism to seek input from relevant stakeholders for the preparation of their work; requests the Special Rapporteur, the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and the expert mechanism to continue to carry out their tasks in a coordinated manner; suggests that the General Assembly adjust the mandate of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Populations to take into account Council resolution 5/1, in particular the creation of the expert mechanism on the rights of indigenous peoples; and encourages those States that have not yet done so to consider ratifying or acceding to the Convention concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries of the International Labour Organization.

STEPHANIE HOCHSTETTER SKINNER-KLEE (Guatemala), introducing the draft resolution, said that it represented the first substantive resolution on the subject of indigenous peoples. The draft resolution tackled various components of the United Nations system related to the rights of indigenous peoples. Guatemala welcomed the report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of indigenous peoples and asked in accordance with the mandate that the expert mechanism of human rights of indigenous peoples prepared a study on the lessons learned to achieve the right of indigenous peoples to education. It also requested the Special Rapporteur and expert mechanism to carry out recommendations for the preparatory Committee for the Durban Review Conference. It requested that the General Assembly adapted the mandate of voluntary contributions fund for the rights of indigenous peoples and hoped that more countries would ratify the Convention of the International Labour Organization on the rights of indigenous peoples.

Action on Resolution on Effective Implementation of International Human Rights Instruments

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.20rev.1) on the effective implementation of international human rights instruments, adopted without a vote, the Council welcomes the measures taken by the human rights treaty bodies to date to improve their functioning with a view to a more coordinated approach to its activities and standardized reporting; welcomes the launch of the Universal Periodic Review of the Council, which shall complement and not duplicate the work of the treaty bodies; urges States to make every effort to meet their reporting obligations under United Nations human rights instruments, submit common-core documents, provide effective follow-up to the concluding observations of the treaty bodies on their reports, disseminate effectively in their territories the full text of the concluding observations of the treaty bodies on their reports, consider carefully the views of the treaty bodies on individual communications and to provide adequate follow-up to such views, and encourage the involvement of civil society in the process of preparation of reports and in follow-up; and urges States when nominating their candidates to treaty bodies to consider the principle of non-accumulation of United Nations human rights mandates at a time.

The Council also reiterates that a priority of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights should be to provide assistance to States parties, upon their request and, if possible, in coordination with other United Nations bodies, Governments and other interested parties; emphasizes the need to ensure financing and adequate staff and information resources for the operations of the human rights treaty bodies, in particular in view of the additional demands placed on the system and, with this in mind, reiterates its request that the Secretary-General provide adequate resources in respect of each treaty body while making the most efficient use of existing resources; and requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council annually, in accordance with its programme of work, on measures taken to implement the present resolution and on obstacles to its implementation, including recommendations for further improving the effectiveness of, harmonizing, and reforming the treaty body system, and to seek the views of States and other stakeholders in this regard.

JOHN VON KAUFMANN (Canada) introduced the draft resolution on the effective implementation of human rights instruments, saying that it updated and streamlined previous resolutions and brought the issue into the Human Rights Council. The main purpose of the resolution was to promote more effective implementation of international human rights instruments. It referred to the new human rights instruments that had been recently adopted and which created new human rights treaty bodies. It also encouraged the human rights treaty bodies to harmonize their work while maintaining their independence. The resolution also aimed at reducing the reporting burden on States parties, promoting more effective follow-up and supported involvement of civil society in the process.

Action on Resolution on the Protection of the Human Rights of Civilians in Armed Conflict

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.21) on the protection of the human rights of civilians in armed conflict, adopted without a vote, as orally revised, the Council emphasizes that conduct that violates international humanitarian law, including grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and of the Protocols Additional relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts may also constitute a gross violation of human rights; expresses its deep concern over violations of human rights during armed conflicts and of international humanitarian law, which undermined the protection of human rights of civilians in armed conflicts; calls upon all States to respect the human rights of civilians in armed conflicts; stresses the importance of combating impunity in order to prevent violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law perpetrated against civilians in armed conflicts; invites the international community to support regional efforts aimed at the protection of civilians in armed conflicts; resolves to address systematic and gross violations of the human rights of civilians in armed conflicts; and decides to continue consideration of this question at its eleventh session with a view to consider requesting the Advisory Committee to elaborate a study with potential recommendations on the protection of human rights of civilians in armed conflicts.

HISHAM BADR (Egypt), introducing the draft resolution, said that the human rights situation of civilians in all types of armed conflict had long been a subject of grave concern to the international community, especially the situation of women, children and vulnerable groups. This also extended to civilians undertaking noble missions in armed conflicts, such as humanitarian workers and others. The draft resolution built on the resolution presented by Egypt and adopted by the former Commission on Human Rights in 2005, with overwhelming support for the protection of human rights of civilians in armed conflict. The text expressed the Council’s resolve to address gross and systematic violations of human rights of civilians in armed conflict and proposed a number of practical steps to advance the Council’s consideration of the matter, such as mandating the Advisory Committee to elaborate a study containing potential recommendations.

Action on Resolution on Human Rights and Transitional Justice

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.22) on human rights and transitional justice, adopted without a vote, the Council emphasizes the importance of a comprehensive approach to transitional justice, incorporating the full range of judicial and non-judicial measures; stresses the importance of a comprehensive process of national consultation, particularly with those affected by human rights violations; recognizes the important role played by victims’ associations, human rights defenders and other actors of civil society, women’s organizations and free and independent media; calls upon the international community and regional organizations to assist countries, who so consent, in the context of transitional justice, to ensure the promotion and protection of human rights and to incorporate best practices into the development and implementation of transitional justice mechanisms; requests the Office of the High Commissioner to continue to enhance its leading role, including with regard to conceptual and analytical work regarding transitional justice, and in assisting States to design, establish and implement transitional justice mechanisms from a human rights perspective; and requests the Office of the High Commissioner to submit an analytical study on human rights and transitional justice which contains an overview of activities undertaken by the United Nations human rights system, including the human rights components of peace missions, an analysis of the work accomplished, a compilation of lessons learned and best practices, an assessment of overall needs, as well as conclusions and recommendations, with a view to assisting countries in the context of transitional justice as well as an inventory of human rights and transitional justice aspects in recent peace agreements.

ROBERTO BALZARETTI (Switzerland), introducing the draft resolution on human rights and transitional justice, said that the text was based on the last substantive resolution on the subject and reflected major developments since, for example establishment of peace-building commissions and their role in post-conflict countries. The draft resolution stressed the importance of a global approach to transitional justice, and the importance of a combination of measures, judicial and non-judicial. It was important to find the approach that fit countries in question and thus emphasized the importance of national broad consultations, particularly with victims of violations, in order to establish the national context and understand specific circumstances. The experience had shown that preconceived solutions did not work and that a great part of the success was due to consultations with the public and victims. The resolution also underlined the role of women in designing judicial mechanisms. It called upon the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, as the lead on transitional justice, to continue the conceptual and analytical work on the issue. The help of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in post-conflict or transitional situations needed to be based on close cooperation with national authorities. National authorities must identify the measures that best suited their needs. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was called upon to submit an exhaustive study on innovation and inventory of transitional justice mechanisms in peace accords.

MUNU MAHAWAR (India), in a general comment, said that India attached great importance to transitional justice. Regarding the draft resolution, India had concerns regarding the request to the Office of the High Commissioner to assist countries in the design and establishment of transitional justice. Such assistance should only be provided with the explicit consent of the country concerned. Also, the conceptual work should be carried out by the Council and not the High Commissioner. India further criticized the practice of closing the text for negotiation several days before the vote. India would formally propose the mentioned changes of the draft resolution during a later stage.

Action on Resolution on the Right to Truth

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.23) on the right to the truth, adopted without a vote, the Council recognizes the importance of respecting and ensuring the right to the truth so as to contribute to ending impunity and to promote and protect human rights; requests the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a comprehensive study, to be presented to the Council at its twelfth session, on best practices for the effective implementation of this right, including in particular practices related to archives and records concerning gross violations of human rights with a view to create guidelines on protecting archives and records concerning gross human rights violations, and programmes for the protection of witnesses and other persons involved in trials connected with such violations; also requests the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a report, to be presented to the Council at its fifteenth session, on the use of forensic experts in case of gross violations of human rights with a view to identifying trends and best practices in this regard; decides to convene a panel to discuss issues related to the present resolution at its thirteenth session; invites special rapporteurs and other mechanisms of the Council, in the framework of their mandates, to take into account, as appropriate, the issue of the right to truth; decides to consider this matter at its twelfth session under the same agenda item or at the correspondence session in conformity with its annual programme of work.

ALBERTO J. DUMONT (Argentina), introducing the draft resolution on right to the truth, said that the resolution continued to develop this important right that began in the Human Rights Commission. It represented the recognition of the legally binding instrument for the first time. The will of the international community recognised the reach of the right to the truth and the importance of truth for victims and families and societies, in case of human rights violations. States were responsible for the provision of effective measures for the society. The draft resolution requested a comprehensive study of best practices, the report on the work of forensic experts and to call a panel to follow up on the exchange of ideas on the current draft.

Action on Resolution on Human Rights Voluntary Goals

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.25) on Human Rights Voluntary Goals, adopted without a vote, the Council encourages States to progressively accomplish the following set of human rights voluntary goals: the universal ratification of the core international human rights instruments and dedication of all efforts toward the universalization of the international human rights obligations of States; the strengthening of the legal, institutional and policy framework at the national level; the establishment of human rights national institutions guided by the Paris Principles and the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action; the elaboration of national human rights programmes and plans of action; the definition and implementation of national programmes of action that promote the realization of the rights and goals set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, inter alia, to eliminate discrimination of any kind; the adoption and implementation of programmes of human rights education, in all learning institutions; to increase cooperation with all mechanisms of the United Nations Human Rights system; the strengthening of mechanisms to facilitate international cooperation in the field of human rights; the creation of favourable conditions at the national, regional, and international levels to ensure the full and effective enjoyment of all human rights; and the strengthening of the capacity to fight hunger and poverty. The Council further requests States to disseminate and promote the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as widely as possible.

ALEXANDRE GUIDO LOPES PAROLA (Brazil), introducing the draft resolution, said that Brazil was convinced that the urgent challenge of the international community was to fully implement the international human rights instruments, internalizing legislation and, above all to put into practice policies focused on the promotion and protection of all human rights on the ground. Brazil was confident that it would be possible to approve the goals and launch the human rights voluntary goals next December within the scope of the commemorative session of the Council on the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This should be a demonstration of trust and capacity of action of the Human Rights Council, and a firm commitment to a positive agenda on human rights, based on non-selectivity and cooperation, gathering countries from the South and the North, developed and developing countries.

RESFEL PINO ALVAREZ (Cuba), in a general comment on the draft resolution on human rights voluntary goals, recognised the value of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but there were many significant gaps, such as the right to development, right to peace, right to solidarity, right to live in healthy environments and other collective and generational rights. Those had been better reflected in the Vienna Declaration. Cuba was pleased that the draft included clear reaffirmation of the norms of the Vienna Action Plan and that it gave importance to the ability of developing countries to fight hunger. There were references to other subjects of particular importance to Cuba and other developing countries, such as the need to put an end to illegal coercive measures that impacted enjoyment of human rights in many parts of the world. Cuba would continue to work with other developing countries to make real the sentence from the Vienna Declaration that said that the international community must deal with human rights in a global manner and in a fair and equitable way.

Action on Resolution on UN Guidelines for the Appropriate Use and Conditions of Alternative Care for Children

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.26rev.1) on United Nations guidelines for the appropriate use and conditions of alternative care for children, adopted without a vote, as orally amended, the Council requests the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to assist in raising awareness by circulating, immediately, the Draft United Nations Guidelines for the Appropriate Use and Conditions of Alternative Care for Children with a view to give full knowledge of it to all members and observers of the Council; invites States to dedicate their efforts, in a transparent process, to discuss with a view to tacking possible action on Draft United Nations Guidelines for the Appropriate Use and Conditions of Alternative Care for Children by its tenth session.

ALEXANDRE GUIDO LOPES PAROLA (Brazil), introducing the resolution, thanked all delegations from all regional groups who supported the process of negotiation and co-sponsored the draft resolution. Brazil was convinced of the urgency of the issue of children without parental care.

MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh), in an explanation of the vote before the vote, appreciated that some of their concerns were taken into consideration while drafting the resolution. Bangladesh was thankful to the delegation of Brazil and other friends for advancing the cause of the right of the child. Those would be the guidelines for the whole United Nations and Bangladesh expected there would be further refinement according to the usual United Nations practice. Bangladesh regretted insufficient clarity about the process of finalization of the guidelines and emphasized it had to be transparent and international-governmental. Bangladesh would join the consensus on this draft resolution.

BENNY YAN PIETER SIAHAAN (Indonesia) said that the issue of alternative care had been an issue for more than 20 years. Indonesia fully supported the idea that the best interest of the children shall be considered of paramount importance. Indonesia had already extensive laws in place in this regard, which were in line with international instruments. The guidelines had to be clarified further and Indonesia was concerned about the drafting process. They joined consensus and hoped that the drafting process of the guidelines would be held in the most open and transparent manner.

Explanations of Vote after Vote at Conclusion of Consideration of Item Three on the Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights

VALERY LOSHCHININ. (Russian Federation) said that the Russian Federation had supported all the draft resolutions under this item, but had a big problem with the now withdrawn resolution on the Holodomor. The Russian Federation was greatly satisfied with the withdrawal. From the outset it had said that the draft resolution had no prospects and was politisized. There was no consensus and there could not be consensus on it. Although the victims had to be remembered, there was no place in the United Nations, the Human Rights Council or other organizations for this issue. The Russian Federation hoped that Ukraine would not use other international fora for this subject.

MITSUKO SHINO (Japan) said that Japan welcomed the guidelines and supported the resolution if it set no time constraints. Japan believed that a broad consultative meeting should take place and not be limited to a group of friends. Japan also pointed out that the resources of the United Nations were not inexhaustible. The Council should give enough time for countries to consider the financial implication of resolutions and the Secretariat should inform the Council about possible savings.

Action on Resolution under Racism and Racial Discrimination

Action on Resolution on Mandate of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.24) on the Mandate of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, adopted without a vote, the Council welcomes and acknowledges the importance and significance of the work of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent; urges consideration of the recommendations of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action follow-up mechanisms in General Assembly and Human Rights Council resolutions; recommends that States undertake measures to ensure adequate representation of people of African descent in the judiciary and other areas of the justice system, and calls upon States to identify factors that have resulted in the disproportionate number of arrests, sentencing and incarceration of Africans and people of African descent. The Council also underscores the importance that States and international and regional organizations ensure that existing mechanisms for complaints for discrimination are accessible to Africans and people of African descent; and decides to extend the mandate of the Working Group on People of African Descent for three years to study the problems of racial discrimination faced by people of African descent living in the Diaspora.

LUVUYO NDIMENI (South Africa), speaking on behalf of the African Group, introduced the draft resolution on the mandate of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent. The Working Group had been established in 2002 and presented a follow-up mechanism to implement the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. It had produced important recommendations in the areas of health, employment, housing, participation in the economic life and role of media. The implementation of recommendations remained a challenge. The draft resolution reflected the terms of reference of the mandate and extended it for three years.

JEAN -BAPTISTE MATTEI (France), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said regarding the mandate of the Working Group on People of African Descent that any ranking and hierarchy of victims of racism had to be avoided. Earlier on, the European Union had had problems with that mandate, but despite its reservations the European Union now joined in. It welcomed the fact that persons of African descent worldwide were considered. The European Union underlined that everybody had to have access to justice and measures should be applicable to people of all ethnic descent. Regarding the High Commissioner’s elaboration of a series of best practices, the European Union believed that the support should not be limit to one ethnic group. Any measure adopted should be applicable to all potential victims. The policies of the European Union applied to all ethnic groups and at the European level had established an agency of basic rights to monitor the human rights situation of all ethnic groups.

MITSUKO SHINO (Japan), in an explanation of the vote after the vote, reiterated its concerns on budgetary implications for the mandate of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent - resolution L.24.

Action on Resolutions under Technical Assistance and Capacity Building

Action on Presidential Statement on Situation of Human Rights in Haiti

In a presidential statement (A/HRC/9/L.9) on the Situation of human rights in Haiti, adopted without a vote, the Council welcomes the recent political developments in Haiti, marked by the formation and installation of a new Government; notes with satisfaction the cooperation between the Haitian National Police and the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) in curbing violence, crime and banditry; encourages the authorities to continue their efforts, in particular as regards reinforcing inspection units within the police and justice systems and eliminating prolonged pre-trial detention. The Council also expresses deep concern at the deterioration of Haitians’ standard of living and quality of life in recent months, partly as a result of the serious economic crisis and acute food shortage; strongly encourages the international community as a whole, and in particular international donors, friendly countries and United Nations specialized agencies, to step up their cooperation with the constituted authorities of Haiti for the full realization of human rights. The Council further welcomes the Haitian authorities’ request to extend the mission of the independent expert on the situation of human rights in Haiti to September 2010 and decides to support the request.

JEAN-CLAUDE PIERRE (Haiti), speaking as a concerned country on the Presidential Statement on the situation of human rights in Haiti, thanked Member States that supported the request of Haitian authorities for continuance of the mandate of the Independent Expert until 2010. The Government of Haiti had decided on the extension after having examined the system of Special Procedures and having seen its positive implications for the country. Haiti paid tribute to the Independent Expert and said his contribution to the consolidation of the rule of the law in Haiti had been enormous. Haiti thanked friendly countries whose support had been essential in maintaining this mandate.

Action on Resolution on Advisory Services and Technical Assistance for Cambodia

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.16) on the advisory services and technical assistance for Cambodia, adopted, as orally revised, without a vote, the Council reaffirms the importance of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and welcomes the progress made; supports the positions of the Government of Cambodia and the United Nations to proceed with the tribunal in a fair, efficient and expeditious manner. The Council welcomes the efforts and progress made by the Government of Cambodia on democracy and situation of human rights and expresses concern about some areas of human rights practices in Cambodia and urges the Government of Cambodia to continue to strengthen its efforts to establish the rule of law; to enhance its efforts to resolve equitably and expeditiously land ownership issues; to continue to create an environment conducive to the conduct of legitimate political activity; and to continue to promote the rights and dignity of all Cambodians by providing political, economic and social freedom.

The Council invites the Secretary-General, agencies of the United Nations system present in Cambodia and the international community, including non-governmental organizations, to continue to work with the Government of Cambodia in improving democracy as well as ensuring the protection and promotion of the human rights of all people in Cambodia; encourages the Government of Cambodia and the international community to provide all the necessary assistance to the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia to bring justice for the most serious cases of violations of human rights in the country; decides to extend by one year the mandate of the special procedure on the situation of human rights in Cambodia through the appointment of a Special Rapporteur to carry out the former functions of the Special Representative to the Secretary-General; requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council at its twelfth session on the role and achievements of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner in assisting the Government and the people of Cambodia in the promotion and protection of human rights.

SHINICHI KITAJIMA (Japan), introducing the draft resolution, said that since the beginning of the mandate in 1993 the situation in Cambodia had improved, especially after the end of the Khmer Rouge. Cambodia had distanced itself from a culture of impunity and recently held peaceful elections. Problems regarding landownership, judiciary, rule of law, impunity and corruption had persisted however. Japan underlined that an extension of this mandate was meaningful for the further development of Cambodia.

SUN SUON (Cambodia), speaking as a concerned country, said that by joining the consensus Cambodia had demonstrated its sincere efforts and commitments to the work of the Council for the further improvement of human rights. It was undeniable that Cambodia continued to engage in a spirit of good will to improve human rights. Those efforts were considered a priority and this should be acknowledged. The resolution would allow for the extension of Special Procedures for Cambodia and Cambodia hoped the new mandate-holder would work constructively and productively with the Government and should concentrate on technical cooperation and advice.

Resolution on Advisory Services and Technical Assistance for Liberia

In a resolution (A/HRC/9/L.19) on Advisory Services and technical assistance for Liberia, adopted without a vote, the Council welcomes the work accomplished by the Independent Expert in assisting the Government of Liberia to maximise the opportunities afforded by technical assistance; encourages the Government of Liberia to continue its work to improve the promotion and protection of human rights, and to reinforce its political commitment to establish an effective national human rights protection system; urges the international community to provide the Government of Liberia with appropriate funding and assistance to enable it better to consolidate human rights, peace and security in its national territory; and requests the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, through its presence in Liberia, to pursue its technical assistance activities and programmes in consultation with the authorities of Liberia.

JEAN -BAPTISTE MATTEI (France), speaking on behalf of the European Union, introducing the resolution, said that the resolution encouraged the Government of Liberia to pursue its work, taking into account the recommendations made by the Independent Expert in his report. The international community should continue to provide its support to Liberia.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC08104E