HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE OPENS NINETY-FOURTH SESSION AND HOLDS DIALOGUE WITH HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

The Human Rights Committee this morning opened its ninety-fourth session and held a dialogue with Navi Pillay, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Committee also heard from a number of non governmental organizations expressing concerns about the situation of human rights in Spain, Nicaragua, Rwanda, Azerbaijan, Australia, Denmark, Japan and Chad, which will be considered during the session.

In her opening address, Navi Pillay, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said she was convinced that the work of the Human Rights Committee had had a real impact, had contributed to promoting the enjoyment of civil and political rights and had led to significant changes to law, policy and practice. The follow-up procedures which the Committee had established allowed it to trace more clearly the specific results achieved through their work. However, there was scope for further development of these procedures to make them more effective, with the support of her Office.

During the meeting, the Committee adopted its agenda. A new member, Helen Keller (Switzerland), who was elected on 28 July 2008 at the twenty-sixth meeting of States parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to replace Committee Expert Walter Kaelin (Switzerland), was sworn in.

Committee Expert Elisabeth Palm presented the report of the Working Group on Communications. She said the Working Group had examined a total of 23 draft recommendations and decisions placed before it by the Secretariat and adopted recommendations on all of them. There were 14 recommendations to declare communications inadmissible, eight recommendations concerning Views and one decision to declare admissible a communication. The Working Group was hampered by the fact that a number of drafts and recommendations became available in the working languages very late.

One Expert commented that the Committee was deeply concerned about the delay in examining individual communications and had to address this problem. Another Expert talked about the delay in the availability of documents in all languages. The High Commissioner said she was aware of this problem which affected all the Committees and her Office was looking into how it could be resolved.

A number of non governmental organizations also expressed their concerns about the situation of human rights in Spain, Nicaragua, Rwanda, Azerbaijan, Australia, Denmark, Japan and Chad, which will be considered during the session. The periodic reports of Spain, Nicaragua, Denmark and Japan will be considered by the committee, and the situation in Rwanda, Azerbaijan, Australia and Chad will be considered in closed meetings.

When the Committee resumes its meeting at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it will start its consideration of the fifth periodic report of Denmark (CCPR/C/DNK/5).

Statement by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

NAVI PILLAY, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, highlighted the important role played by the treaty bodies in the United Nations’ efforts to create a global culture of human rights. She further noted the importance of encouraging States to reach universal ratification of human rights treaties and their implementation at the national level. In her view, the observations and recommendations adopted by treaty bodies should constitute one of the main bases of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ country engagement strategies.

Ms. Pillay was convinced that the work of the Human Rights Committee had had a real impact, had contributed to promoting the enjoyment of civil and political rights and had led to significant changes to law, policy and practice. The follow-up procedures which the Committee had established allowed the Committee to trace more clearly the specific results achieved through their work. However, there was scope for further development of these procedures to make them more effective, with the support of her Office.

Ms. Pillay supported the continuation of the discussion of the Committee’s working methods under the Optional Protocol so as to be able to deal with the large number of communications currently pending, which were well over 400 at present. Furthermore, Ms. Pillay welcomed the Committee’s efforts to devise a media strategy, as there was a need to make the work of treaty bodies more accessible and more visible.

Ms. Pillay drew special attention to the Committee’s interaction with other entities that shared the same concerns, including among them the Special Advisor of the Secretary-General on genocide. She said that genocide was the ultimate crime. Everyone must all do everything in their power to prevent it and help States address the root causes that made genocide atrocities possible.

Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner

In the interactive dialogue, Experts asked the High Commissioner to elaborate on her thoughts on the harmonisation of working methods among treaty bodies, an issue that her predecessor had proposed. An Expert also raised the question if the Committee should work as an early warning system regarding sudden changes in a country in human rights issues. The Expert mentioned an example from an earlier session, in which the Committee had drawn attention to the fact that Iran had recently passed a law reinstalling the death penalty although it had earlier pledged to abolish it.

Experts also wanted to know how the High Commissioner saw the relation between the Committee and the Human Rights Council and wanted her to clarify the use of the Committee’s reports in this context. One Expert emphasised that the Committee’s work so far had little impact on the field operations of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and that this relationship should be strengthened. Regarding the Universal Periodic Review process, an Expert asked the High Commissioner to further elaborate on the contribution of the Committee to this process.

One Expert called on the High Commissioner to put greater emphasis on human rights education. Another Expert underlined how important it was that the High Commissioner made the jurisprudence of the Committee known during her consultations with States.

Ms. Pillay, responding to the Expert’s questions, said that the harmonisation of working methods was necessary because it facilitated the work of Members States and non governmental organizations. However, it was up to the Committee Experts to decide how harmonization could proceed, also regarding the harmonization with field offices. She also underlined that every statement by a Committee increased the visibility of treaty bodies.

Statements by Non Governmental Organizations

Spain

URKA AIARTZA, Basque Observatory of Human Rights BEHATOKIA, drew attention to the measures taken by the Spanish Government regarding the Basque conflict. Against recommendations from this Committee to shorten the periods of incommunicado detention to less than five days, the Government had prolonged this period to 13 days. In the legal reform undertaken by the Government, individual terrorism or non-organised terrorism was being considered and the definition of terrorist acts widened, so that it included mere acts of opinion or dissidence. This led to a politicization of the justice system. The lack of physical violence as a defining element for terrorist deeds caused an irreparable impact on the liberty of expression, assembly and manifestation.

DAVID FERNANDEZ PUYANA, Spanish Society for International Human Rights Law, said that torture and mistreatment, although not systematic, were still widespread in 2007 and that the victims belonged to a variety of social groups, especially immigrants. Spain had so far not taken any measures recommended by the Committee. The organization requested the Spanish Government to derogate the 1977 amnesty law so that it could no longer be applied to give impunity to grave violations of human rights, in particular enforced disappearances that had taken place in the context of the Spanish Civil War and the Franco regime.

Nicaragua

ORLANE VARESANO, World Organization against Torutre, speaking on behalf of a number of Nicaraguan non governmental organizations, said that there was an urgent need for legislation regarding arbitrary arrest and other issues in Nicaragua. They called for an urgent review of the abortion law, since more and more women would now resort to clandestine abortion that put their lives under severe risk. Also, corporal punishment did not appear in the Penal Code and the State did not assume its responsibility in this issue. Prison conditions were desperate: there was an overall lack of budget, security, nourishment, access to medicines and care.

Rwanda

PATRICK MUTZENBERG, on behalf of the Coalition of National Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) from Rwanda, addressed several issues in Rwanda, among them the right to defence in the Gacaca jurisdiction, a semi-traditional form of justice considering cases of genocide. The defendants could only count on the support of the community and in rare cases on NGOs to ensure their right to defence. Also, the witnesses that played a crucial role in this form of justice were not sufficiently protected. They were repeatedly victims of intimidation, aggression and sometimes even murder in order to stop them from testifying.

Azerbaijan

PEGGY BRETT, on behalf of the Coalition of National Non Governmental Organizations from Azerbaijan, said that it was dissatisfied with the lack of involvement of civil society in the process of negotiations and confidence building on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict where the local population was calling for self determination. Since 1993, the region was controlled by neighbouring Armenia, in a situation which was similar to that of South Ossetia before the August crisis. The Azerbaijani Government discouraged the contacts between civil society and the conflicting parties.

Australia

LES MALESER, Australian Foundation for Aboriginal and Islander Research Action, said regarding the rights of Aboriginal people in Australia, the right of self determination was a fundamental right. The Human Rights Committee should always look at the situation of indigenous peoples as soon as a country that had indigenous peoples appeared before it. Since the time of colonization, indigenous peoples could not exercise their right to self determination. Disputes with States should be adjudicated by independent procedures. The Committee should raise questions regarding treaties that had been or had not been made between the State and aboriginal peoples in their country.

Spain and Denmark

LUKAS MACHON, International Commission of Jurists, said regarding the report of Spain that the law so far failed to protect detainees from torture and that they would be held incommunicado for up to 14 days. Denmark should pay special attention to hate speech while ensuring the freedom of expression.

Japan and Nicaragua

JOHN FISHER, ARC International, welcomed Japan’s legislative efforts considering the fight against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender-identity. However, the organization wished for further comments on the scope of the draft law and a specific timetable for the implementation of the law that was suggested. On Nicaragua, Mr. Fisher recommended that the country take new measures to fight discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Chad

PATRICK MUTZENBERG, TIDH Chad, said that the issue of judicial reforms was a dead letter in Chad. The organization was particularly worried about preventive detention. In some cases, detainees were held in pre-trial detention in Chad for a duration that which was longer than the maximum prison sentence for the suspected crime. Further, prisons were in such desperate conditions that some prisoners were permanently chained. Freedom of the press was heavily limited, and several journalists and reporters had been detained and stopped from expressing their opinions.

For use of the information media; not an official record

CT08016E