ADVISORY COMMITTEE ADOPTS SIX RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION
OF HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL AND CONCLUDES SESSION

The Advisory Committee this morning concluded its fourth substantive session after adopting six recommendations for the consideration of the Human Rights Council. Among these recommendations were texts on the draft set of principles and guidelines for the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their families; on the draft United Nations declaration on human rights education and training; on a preliminary study on discrimination in the context of the right to food; the human rights of older persons; missing persons; and the protection of the human rights of civilians in armed conflict. The Committee also adopted its report ad referendum.

The Committee recommended that the Council request Shigeki Sakamoto to take into consideration the views of relevant actors and to submit the revised draft set of principles and guidelines for the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their family members to the Advisory Committee for consideration at its fifth session.

On human rights education and training, the Committee endorsed the draft declaration on human rights education and training annexed to the recommendation and transmitted the draft declaration to the Human Rights Council for consideration at its thirteenth session.

The Committee submitted to the Human Rights Council a preliminary study on discrimination in the context of the right to food prepared by the drafting group on the right to food as revised in the plenary discussions of the Advisory Committee and also recommended that the Council consider requesting the Advisory Committee to undertake a study on the rights of peasants, particularly rural women, and other people living in rural areas.

Concerning older people, the Committee expressed the hope that the Human Rights Council would consider entrusting the Advisory Committee with the preparation of a study on the application to older persons of existing United Nations human rights instruments and on any possible gaps in the current legal framework.

The Committee recommended that the Human Rights Council consider adopting the following decision: "The Human Rights Council takes note of the progress report on best practices in the matter of missing persons submitted by the Advisory Committee and encourages the Committee to finalise the report in the light of the discussions on the subject by the Council and comments received from States and other stakeholders".

And the Committee recommended that the Human Rights Council consider authorising Ms. Mona Zulficar, member of the Advisory Committee, to attend the second expert consultation on the issue of protecting the human rights of civilians in armed conflict.

Speaking this morning were Shigeki Sakamoto; Emmanuel Decaux; Mona Zulficar; Chinsung Chung; Latif Huseynov Antonio Bengoa Cabello; Vladimir Kartashkin; Dheerujlall Seetulsingh; Halima Embarek Warzazi; Mona Zulficar; and Latif Huseynov.

Speaking at the end of the meeting was Eric Tistounet, Chief of the Human Rights Council Branch of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

The next session of the Advisory Committee will be held from 2 to 6 August 2010.

Action on Recommendation on Draft Principles and Guidelines for the Elimination of Discrimination against Persons Affected by Leprosy and their Family Members

In a recommendation to the Human Rights Council on a draft set of principles and guidelines for the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their family members (A/HRC/AC/4/L.1), adopted unanimously, the Advisory Committee recommends that the Council requests Mr. Sakamoto to take into consideration the views of relevant actors and to submit the revised draft set of principles and guidelines to the Advisory Committee for consideration at its fifth session; and requests the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide Mr. Sakamoto with all the assistance necessary to enable him to accomplish the above-mentioned task.

SHIGEKI SAKAMOTO, Advisory Committee Expert, introducing recommendation L.1, said his task was to finalise a draft set of principles and guidelines for the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their families, for submission to the Council at its fifteenth session in September 2010. The recommendation started with a short preamble, and, in the operative parts, welcomed the views of relevant actors on the draft set of principles and guidelines, and requested Mr. Sakamoto to submit the draft set of principles and guidelines in a timely manner. It also requested the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to assist Mr. Sakamoto in achieving this task. He hoped the recommendation would be adopted by the Committee.

JOSE ANTONIO BENGOA Cabello, Advisory Committee Vice-Chairperson, wondered if paragraph two should still point out that a revised draft should be presented as it had been worked on for some time. He wondered if it would not be better to say final draft instead.

In response, Mr. Sakamoto said that they had already discussed the matter the other day and that the Advisory Committee had agreed to maintain the wording as such.

Action on Recommendation on Draft UN Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training

In a recommendation to the Human Rights Council on the draft United Nations declaration on human rights education and training (A/HRC/AC/4/L.2), adopted by consensus as orally amended, the Advisory Committee endorses the draft declaration on human rights education and training annexed to the recommendation, as revised; transmits the draft declaration to the Human Rights Council for consideration at its thirteenth session; recommends to the Council that the draft declaration be disseminated widely and encourages further initiatives by the various stakeholders to promote collective consultations on the draft declaration; recommends that the Council keep the drafting group informed of the follow-up to the work of the Human Rights Council and that it might be involved, in appropriate ways in the ongoing debate and in the work of awareness-raising in the area of human rights education and training; and expresses the hope that the Council invite Emmanuel Decaux, Committee Member and Rapporteur of the Working Group on the draft declaration to participate in the work of the Council devoted to the study of the draft that had been submitted.

EMMANUEL DECAUX, Advisory Committee Expert, introducing L.2 said the Council gave the Advisory Committee the mandate to produce a preliminary draft to be submitted to it during the March session. The end of the technical phase had been reached. A lot of work had been done, and a clear and precise text had been produced. The Committee could do better, but the last three days had been very productive. A number of amendments would be introduced later on. A political phase was now beginning with the passing-on of this document to the Council, and this would give a new lease of life to the draft.

VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Advisory Committee Expert, said the document had been discussed in great detail and approved. Over numerous discussions, he had introduced several proposals, some of which had been included by Mr. Decaux. The question of bolstering the implementation of the convention had not been included by him yet. Mr. Kartashkin said he fully approved the text. He suggested that it would be very good for the Human Rights Council to invite Mr. Decaux to discuss the convention. That would be useful both for the Council and the Advisory Committee in terms of improving their future work on the matter.

DHEERUJLALL SEETULSINGH, Advisory Committee Expert, said Mr. Decaux should attend the meetings of the Council, but the request needed to be transmitted now to the Secretariat in order for Mr. Decaux to be able to attend the meeting, as if it were included in the recommendation, then his participation would have to wait for the recommendation to be approved, and that would take place at the end of the March session of the Council.

EMMANUEL DECAUX, Advisory Committee Expert, said the spirit of the request should be honoured, and the sequencing was not the most important. The recommendation would be read before the session of the Council began in March.

VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Advisory Committee Expert, said that during its work, the Committee had already come up against that issue and he recalled how they had resolved it. Experts went to the Council session and were already in the room and prior to the debate they had already resolved the matter. The only question left to resolve was that of costs but he thought that Mr. Decaux would be able to resolve that.

EMMANUEL DECAUX, Advisory Committee Expert, said what was important was the precedent - five members of the Drafting Committee needed to be present during the meeting discussing their work, and if one of these had to, for example, come from a long way away, then there was the issue of funding, and the precedent set thereby.

HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Advisory Committee Chairperson, said she would resolve the issue by writing a letter to the President of the Human Rights Council.

MONA ZULFICAR, Advisory Committee Expert, said the Committee should do both things - it should write a letter recommending the presence of the Experts, and also redraft the text of the recommendation slightly to make the presence of the Experts explicit at the meeting of the Council, and this could be included in paragraph four of the recommendation. The Committee as a whole supported the idea of the attendance of Experts at the Council meeting.

Action on Recommendation on Study on Discrimination and the Right to Food

In a recommendation to the Human Rights Council on a Preliminary study on discrimination in the context of the right to food (A/HRC/AC/4/L.3), adopted by consensus, as orally amended, the Advisory Committee submits to the Human Rights Council a preliminary study on discrimination in the context of the right to food prepared by the drafting group on the right to food as revised in the plenary discussions of the Advisory Committee; recommends that the Council authorise the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to request all United Nations Member States, all relevant United Nations bodies, special agencies and programmes and other international organizations, as well as non-governmental organizations, to give their views and comments on the good practices and anti-discriminatory policies and strategies set out in the report to address discrimination in the context of the right to food of vulnerable individuals and groups, so that such views can be taken into account in the preparation of the final study; and also recommends that the Council consider requesting the Advisory Committee to undertake a study on the rights of peasants, particularly rural women, and other people living in rural areas.

MONA ZULFICAR, Advisory Committee Expert, said the Human Rights Council, in March 2009 had requested the Committee to do a study on discrimination and the right to food, including strategies and to report to the Council at its thirteenth session. The Advisory Committee had established a drafting group, which produced a conceptual framework in August 2009, which it had then approved. The Committee had talks and circulated the draft. Further suggestions were made to revise the study. It was finalized as a preliminary study. In document L3, they were proposing changes to the draft at hand with some oral revisions, which she wanted to go through slowly, as those had been discussed among Committee Members. She noted that the title should read preliminary study, to be consistent with resolution10/12 of the Human Rights Council. The Committee wanted to add a second preamble. It also wanted to insert a fifth preamble paragraph. Paragraph 1 of the text had to be revised. In paragraph 2 the Committee had proposed some drafting changes to be inclusive of all the stakeholders’ contributions. In paragraph 3 of the recommendations they wanted to address the rights of peasants, especially rural women more, which should constitute a main part of the study. Those were the changes to L3, which had been put forward for adoption.

VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Advisory Committee Expert, said he wished to draw the attention of all present to the fact that there were more co-sponsors to the recommendation, as many Members had decided to become co-sponsors, and the number was actually higher than the document said, and this was the case with other documents as well.

Action on Recommendation of Human Rights of Older Persons

In a recommendation to the Human Rights Council on the human rights of older persons (A/HRC/AC/4/L.4), adopted by consensus, the Advisory Committee expresses the hope that the Human Rights Council will consider entrusting the Advisory Committee with the preparation of a study on the application to older persons of existing United Nations human rights instruments and on any possible gaps in the current legal framework.

CHINSUNG CHUNG, Advisory Committee Expert, introducing L.4, said she wished to re-read the final paragraph of the preambular part of the recommendation, and did so. This part, she said, was added by the kind advice of the Secretariat, as a basis of this proposal for the Advisory Committee. There was only one operative paragraph. The content was very mild, and used the term "expressed the hope" rather than "recommended".

MONA ZULFICAR, Advisory Committee Expert, said while she appreciated Ms. Chung’s concerns, given that the report had gained the unanimous support of all of the Committee’s Members, she thought the Committee should recommend and not just hope. That was within its mandate and right, especially when it felt that there was an area that required attention and further study.

VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Advisory Committee Expert, said he supported the proposal made by Ms. Zulficar, as a recommendation had to be made to the Human Rights Council to ask the Advisory Committee to prepare a relevant study. He wished to ask the Members of the Committee to consider the following, in order to ensure that the Human Rights Council did not have any doubts about the need to conduct this type of study, then the Experts should consider deletion of the part of the penultimate preambular paragraph, containing the phrase "in the form of an international instrument". There may be some doubt in the Council concerning the need for such an international instrument, and, at this stage, the Committee could avoid mentioning such a convention, and later on the study could propose some form of international convention and make proposals relating to the provisions of that convention. But at this stage, to ensure that the Human Rights Council had no doubts, then the section could be dropped, even though Mr. Kartashkin was in favour of this convention.

LATIF HUSEYNOV, Advisory Committee Rapporteur, said he supported the proposal made by Mr. Kartashkin. However crucial that was, it was not relevant within the current document. The need to carry out research was not linked to or a precondition for drafting a convention. There were other reasons why the study was important. As co sponsor, he thought that hoping and recommending did not change the essence of submitting proposals to the Human Rights Council. It was crucial to act within the rules of procedures and guidelines. Research proposals should include a timetable, which could go in the last paragraph. Rule 17 of the rules of procedures required certain elements to be indicated, including a time scale for the study.

CHINSUNG CHUNG, Advisory Committee Expert, agreed to the deletion of part of the preambular paragraph, but wished to keep the phrase "expressed the hope" in the operative paragraph. As for the timetable, it remained to be set by the Human Rights Council.

Action on Recommendation on Missing Persons

In a recommendation to the Human Rights Council on Missing persons (A/HRC/AC/4/L.5), adopted unanimously, the Advisory Committee decides to submit the progress report to the Human Rights Council for consideration at its fourteenth session; and recommends that the Human Rights Council consider adopting the following decision: "The Human Rights Council takes note of the progress report on best practices in the matter of missing persons submitted by the Advisory Committee and encourages the Committee to finalise the report in the light of the discussions on the subject by the Council and comments received from States and other stakeholders; invites States that have not already done so to respond to the questionnaire on missing persons, emphasising the crucial importance of their responses for the finalisation of the study; and requests the Advisory Committee to submit the final report to the Council at the ..th session of the Council."

LATIF HUSEYNOV, Advisory Committee Rapporteur, introducing L.5, said he had an amendment to be made which had been agreed upon by the drafting group, which was to add to the text the other Human Rights Council decision relating to the issue of missing persons as a second preambular paragraph. On behalf of the drafting group, he wished to thank the Advisory Committee for its cooperation. In the operative part of the text, the draft recommendation said that the Committee decided to submit a progress report to the Human Rights Council for consideration at its fourteenth session, and consider that the Human Rights Council consider adopting a decision taking note of the progress report and encouraged the Committee to finalise that report, among others.

Action on Recommendation on Protection of Human Rights of Civilians in Armed Conflict

In a recommendation to the Human Rights Council on Protection of the human rights of civilians in armed conflict (A/HRC/AC/4/L.6), adopted unanimously, the Advisory Committee recommends that the Human Rights Council consider authorising Ms. Mona Zulficar, member of the Advisory Committee, to attend the second expert consultation on the issue of protecting the human rights of civilians in armed conflict in order to acquire information that would be instrumental in the preparation of a study with potential recommendations on the protection of the human rights of civilians in armed conflict.

MONA ZULFICAR, Advisory Committee Expert, introducing L.6, said this had been previously raised in a prior session of the Council, in which it expressed its intention to consider asking the Committee to elaborate a study with potential recommendations on the protection of the human rights of civilians in armed conflict. The Human Rights Council invited an expert consultation on the subject and then passed resolution 12/5, inviting the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to have a second expert consultation on this topic. This was a very positive trend, and all of these were building blocks in the preparation for a study by the Advisory Committee. Ms. Zulficar had expressed an interest in building on this subject from the beginning, and was asking in this recommendation that the Advisory Committee, after recalling the two resolutions of the Human Rights Council, recommend to the Council to authorise that she attend the second expert consultation in order to gather information that would be instrumental in the preparation of such a study.


Closing Statements

HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Advisory Committee Chairperson, in concluding remarks, said the work had taken place in an atmosphere of mutual understanding, and there had been a fruitful dialogue. Thanks to the Experts' wisdom, experience, dynamism and sense of responsibility, the session was coming to a close with all convinced that they had fulfilled the tasks entrusted to them by the Human Rights Council. The recommendations aimed to combat all forms of discrimination which affected a great number of victims, in particular victims of leprosy, and a draft declaration had been written which would enable people who were exposed to serious human rights violations to finally have access to full enjoyment of their human rights. This would not happen overnight, but it was hoped it would happen in a near future, where children could grow up in a household where tolerance, harmony and mutual respect reigned, where peace reigned, making the entire world a pleasant place to live.

Experts had worked seriously, devoting a lot of time to a worrying and heart-rending situation for close to two billion people, who were, or were going to be victims of hunger, illness and multiple forms of discrimination. The studies carried out or to be carried out aimed to raise the awareness of the international community as a whole to the drama and the tragedy of those who were victims of food insecurity, an insupportable scourge on this twenty-first century, which should have dawned with hope. Women and the elderly had not been forgotten, despite the lack of time. The presence in the Committee of an expert on missing persons contributed to the work of the Committee, but it was desirable that such a presence continue, as it would ensure an effective dialogue between the Committee and those with specific knowledge of human rights issues. It had been a fruitful session.

MONA ZULFICAR, Advisory Committee Expert, on behalf of the African Group, thanked the leadership of Ms. Warzazi, who had navigated through difficult waters to get them through the meeting with fruitful results. She thanked the Committee for its team spirit during a very short session. The Secretariat had, as usual, been very helpful despite the Haiti talks. She was most grateful to the interpreters and to all the support the Advisory Committee had received from NGOs and from Government observers. She looked forward to their continued work next August in order to improve the status of human rights.

JOSE ANTONIO BENGOA CABELLO, Advisory Committee Vice-Chairperson, on behalf of the Latin American Group, expressed his thanks to Ms. Warzazi for her pleasant leadership, as her experience had enabled the Committee to touch on issues and areas that were very significant. Usually at these times, appeals were made to members of delegations to pass on the information of what had been discussed and approved today, and he hoped that delegations would support the Advisory Committee in the Council. In the years to come, a relationship should be developed that was closer and closer with the Human Rights Council. The Committee could cover more issues and go into greater depth with these issues, and thus Member States of the United Nations could be confident that the Experts were meeting with humility and experience, tackling complicated issues in a clear and transparent way, and Government delegates should convey these.

CHINSUNG CHUNG, Advisory Committee Expert, on behalf of the Asian Group, expressed her appreciation to all her colleagues who had participated in the recent talks on various human rights issues at this Advisory Committee session, which had been very constructive. She hoped that the Human Rights Council would acknowledge its efforts. She thanked Ms. Warzazi for her wonderful and fair leadership. She thanked the Secretariat and others for their immense help and their efforts to make good and thorough recommendations. She hoped that she and Mr. Sakamoto would be re-elected and that they would get together in the Committee’s next session in August 2010.

JEAN ZIEGLER, Advisory Committee Vice-Chairperson, in concluding remarks on behalf of the Western Group, said he shared all that had already been said, and he admired the friendly way in which Ms. Warzazi had guided the Committee's work with such wisdom, using all her experience and diplomatic skills. Ms. Warzazi had many things that she did - she was the Committee's Chair, but also worked with missions behind the scenes, defending human rights, the status and role played by the Committee, which was still questioned by some States when looking at the future structure of the Human Rights Council. The future of the Committee was very closely linked to these discussions, and the Chairperson was playing a very effective role in this work, trying to ensure that the Committee had a future and even a broader mandate. The Committee had to remember this.

VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Advisory Committee Expert, said he would be very brief. His regional group only had two people and after Mr. Zeigler’s brilliant intervention, everyone had been thanked eloquently. He had nothing to add to his words. Still, he wanted to thank the Chair for her fantastic work during the session and for its excellent and effective outcomes. He commended all those who had contributed to the success of the Advisory Committee’s work.

ERIC TISTOUNET, Chief of the Human Rights Council Branch of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said he shared the admiration expressed here for the work of Ms. Warzazi, and the energy she had shown in order to ensure the successful work of the Committee, and the respect that she showed to Members of the Secretariat, and also wished to thank all members of the Committee for this spirit of working collectively and involving the Secretariat in all work. This week had been a very difficult and busy one for the Secretariat, with a special session of the Human Rights Council among other events. The commitment of the members of the Secretariat was impressive. With regards to the Committee, it was now an integral part of the Human Rights Council - the structure could be revised, but it was already four years old, and part of the thanks for this was due to the Advisory Committee and all of those on it. The Advisory Committee had a specific role to play within the Human Rights Council's structure, and he hoped that its work would be used fully. It had discussed very important issues: the elderly, the right to food, missing persons and leprosy, among others, showing what this Committee was doing and what it could do. The commitment had to continue.

For use of the information media; not an official record

AC10/009E