ADVISORY COMMITTEE DISCUSSES ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST PERSONS AFFECTED BY LEPROSY AND RULES OF PROCEDURE AND METHODS OF WORK

The Human Rights Council Advisory Committee this afternoon continued its consideration of draft guidelines on the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their family members, following which it took up its draft rules of procedure and methods of work.

In the context of its discussion on the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy, speakers said the working paper dealt with the issue of leprosy as a human rights issue, and from the viewpoint of elimination of discrimination against those affected by leprosy and their families. If Professor Sakamoto believed that segregation of the person affected on the grounds of their illness was a violation of their liberty, then he should say so clearly. There was no need to elaborate on the conditions of detention, as if it were a clear violation, good quality of detention was irrelevant. The Advisory Committee should refer the text, after amendments, to the Human Rights Council for adoption.

Responding to these comments and those made during the morning meeting, Shigeki Sakamoto, the Committee Expert who drafted the working paper on the draft principles and guidelines, said, with regard to the historical stigma, he did in fact delve into the topic and noted that with the death of father Damien people began to realize that it was in fact an infectious disease, and not a hereditary one. On the question of addressees in the guidelines being only States, he said he agreed that in addition to States, the international community and civil society should also be addressed. Persons affected by leprosy and their family members should not be segregated or deprived of basic freedoms against their will. Provisional isolation for treatment and segregation should not be confused with one another.

Introducing the working paper on draft rules of procedures of the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee, Committee Expert Latif Huseynov said the draft was prepared based on resolution 5/1 on institution-building of the UN Human Rights Council, and where the mandate and functions of the Committee and membership was clearly laid down. He spoke about issues on the independence and impartiality of the Committee, and calculation of the duration of the term of office of experts. At the end of the afternoon, Committee experts decided to set up a Working Group to continue the discussion.

Speaking this afternoon were the following Committee Experts: Purificacion V. Quisumbing; Dheerujlall Seetulsingh; Latif Huseynov; Mona Zulficar; Alfonso Miguel Martinez; Halima Embarek Warzazi; Emmanuel Decaux; Vladimir Kartashkin; Wolfgang Stefan Heinz; and Baba Kura Kaigama.

Also speaking was the representative of Japan.


The next meeting of the Committee will be on Tuesday, 4 August at 10 a.m., when it will take up its agenda item on human rights education and training.

General Discussion on Elimination of Discrimination of Persons Affected By Leprosy and Their Families

AKIO ISOMATA (Japan) said Japan appreciated the submission of the draft principles and guidelines by Professor Sakamoto. That working paper dealt with the issue of leprosy as a human rights issue, and from the viewpoint of elimination of discrimination against those affected by leprosy and their families. The Advisory Committee should refer the text, after amendments, to the Human Rights Council for adoption. Without prejudice to the contents and substance of the draft guidelines, the Government of Japan very much hoped that an effective set of principles and guidelines would be considered in the upcoming Council session, with the broad support of Member States. As for the format of the document to be submitted, a set of principles and guidelines would be the subject of consideration by the Human Rights Council, but it might be useful for the background information contained in the paper to be provided to the Council in an appropriate form.

SHIGEKI SAKAMOTO, Advisory Committee Expert, responding to questions and concerns made during the discussion on the draft set of principles and guidelines on persons affected by leprosy, said, with regard to the historical stigma, that he did in fact delve into the topic and noted that with the death of father Damien, people had begun to realize that it was in fact an infectious disease, and not a hereditary one. On good examples of educational campaigns, he was not aware of any successful ones, but in Japan education on human rights was provided to high school and university students. Regarding the fact that the guidelines were only addressed to States, he agreed that in addition to States, the international community and civil society should also be addressed. States’ role was to enact the law. However, since discrimination was deeply rooted in society it was also important to pay special attention to awareness-raising. However, he stressed that the guidelines, especially the awareness-raising element, could not be moved into the principles section, and therefore he did not agree with the proposed change to do that. He did, however, agree that the wording where he used “not infectious” should be changed to “not highly infectious”.

Mr. Sakamoto underscored that persons affected by leprosy and their family members should not be segregated or deprived of basic freedoms against their will. Provisional isolation for treatment and segregation should not be confused with one another. He welcomed ideas from the floor on how that change could be applied in the text. He also agreed that isolation was not synonymous with segregation, and he had to clarify the use of the segregation in the draft paper. He was convinced that he had to refer to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, because they had to reaffirm the universality and interrelatedness of all human rights, and did not agree with excluding that point in the draft. Furthermore, he called on Committee Experts to submit any concrete proposals they wished to make as there was still time to make changes to the draft.

PURIFICACION V. QUISUMBING, Vice-Chairperson of the Advisory Committee, said she had recommended inclusion of the rights of indigenous peoples and minorities, and wondered whether that had been accepted or disregarded, or simply ignored.

DHEERUJLALL SEETULSINGH, Advisory Committee Expert, said that suggestions had been made as to awareness-raising by Professor Decaux, and the need to include the private sector in order to reinforce feelings of responsibility.

LATIF HUSEYNOV, Rapporteur of the Advisory Committee, said he had understood that Professor Sakamoto was ready to accept most of his comments. He agreed with the suggestion that the issues that Professor Sakamoto had mentioned could be further discussed, namely with regard to arbitrary detention. If Professor Sakamoto believed that segregation of the person affected on the grounds of their illness was a violation of their liberty, then he should say so clearly. There was no need to elaborate on the conditions of detention, as if it were a clear violation, good quality of detention was irrelevant.

MONA ZULFICAR, Advisory Committee Expert, proposed, with regard to the sensitive issue of segregation, that it be added to the principles section that any isolation in treatment should be temporary or provisional isolation only, and in the context of health-related provisions, such as the provisions made for tuberculosis and malaria, among others. She also proposed that under the health-care section, there should be a paragraph recommending to States that they put in place early warning mechanisms for treatment programmes and that they determine national targets to reduce rates of leprosy, as was the mythology used by the World Health Organization. If persons affected by leprosy had the same kind of attention from health-care givers obviously a lot of problems could be avoided in a progressive way.

MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ, Advisory Committee Expert, said Professor Sakamoto had made reference to what he had said that morning, and with regard to what Ms. Zulficar said, that could improve the text.


For use of the information media; not an official record

AC09013E