HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE CONCLUDES SESSION AFTER ADOPTING FOUR RECOMMENDATIONS TO HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

The Human Rights Council Advisory Committee this morning concluded its fifth session after adopting four recommendations to be transmitted to the Human Rights Council on: the right to food, the right of peoples to peace, principles and guidelines for the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their family members, and the enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights. The Committee also adopted its report ad referendum.

Speaking in concluding remarks, the Committee Chairperson, Purificacion V. Quisumbing, said that the fifth session of the Advisory Committee had seen the accomplishment of another concrete output, namely the endorsement of the draft set of guidelines and principles on the elimination of discrimination against all persons affected by leprosy and their family members, which would be presented before the Council at its upcoming fifteenth session. In this regard, the Committee had strived to achieve an implementation-oriented tool in line with the Committee’s mandate. It was collectively hoped that discussions in the next session of the Advisory Committee would continue to be enriched by exchanges and inputs from different stakeholders, both governmental and from within civil society.

In the text on the right to food, the Committee assigned the conclusion of the study on discrimination in the context of the right to food to the present Drafting Group, and requested the Group to report on it to the Advisory Committee at its sixth session. It also assigned the preparation of the preliminary study on ways and means to further advance the rights of people working in rural areas to the Drafting Group, and requested it to report to the Advisory Committee at its sixth session.

In the text on the right of peoples to peace, the Committee requested the Drafting Group to submit a draft progress report to the sixth session of the Advisory Committee before its submission to the Human Rights Council at its seventeenth session.

In the text on the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their family members, the Committee submitted the revised principles and guidelines to the Human Rights Council for consideration at its fifteenth session as requested; and requested the Human Rights Council to give due consideration to, and to adopt, the revised principles and guidelines.

In the text on the enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights, the Committee entrusted a Drafting Group with the task of undertaking preparatory work on this subject for consideration by the Advisory Committee.

Speaking in introductions of texts were Mona Zulficar, Wolfgang Stefan Heinz, Shigeki Sakamoto, and Dheerujlall Seetulsingh. Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, the Rapporteur for the session, also introduced the report of the session.

Speaking in general comments were Emmanuel Decaux, Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, José Antonia Bengoa Cabello, Halima Embarek Warzazi, Vladimir Kartashkin, Latif Huseynov, Mona Zulficar, Dheerujlall Seetulsingh, and Jean Ziegler.

The next meeting of the Advisory Committee will be held in January 2011.

Action on Recommendations

In the recommendation on the study on discrimination in the context of the right to food, (A/HRC/AC/5/L.1) adopted without a vote, the Advisory Committee assigns the conclusion of the study on discrimination in the context of the right to food to the present Drafting Group, and requests the Group to report on it to the Advisory Committee at its sixth session; and assigns the preparation of the preliminary study on ways and means to further advance the rights of people working in rural areas to the Drafting Group on the right to food, and requests the Group to report to the Advisory Committee at its sixth session.

MONA ZULFICAR, Advisory Committee Expert, introducing draft recommendation L.1 on the right to food, said the Drafting Group had proposed the text that reflected the mandate received from the Council in response to the preliminary study that was submitted in the last session. The Committee had now the preliminary study as a basis to continue to work on discrimination in the context of the right to food and work on the views and the comments submitted thereon by the Member States of the Council, the United Nations agencies, programmes, international organizations, non-governmental organizations and all stakeholders. On that basis, the Drafting Group would continue to work, taking in those comments, and continue to produce a final draft study. Also, the Council had responded positively to the request to study with more focus on the rural population, who had clearly come out to be the more disadvantaged and discriminated against in the preliminary study, and had requested the Group prepare a preliminary study on ways and means to advance the rights of all the various segments of the rural population. The recommendation was based on all of this. The Group confirmed that the study would be completed by the existing Drafting Group, and would continue with the second mandate that came out of the first mandate.

EMMANUEL DECAUX, Advisory Committee Expert, in a general comment, said that he was disappointed that the document was only produced in one language, English. He was not suggesting that the procedure be halted but wanted to make sure that it did not become a precedent. It was important to provide versions in multiple languages, particularly in French. He did not want to insist on this but hoped that this situation was exceptional and would not happen again in future sessions.

LAURA DOLCI-KANAAN, of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Secretariat, responding to this issue, said the forty-eight hour turnaround for translation of documents had been waived at the beginning of the session on the understanding that the translations in all languages of the recommendations would not be ready. That having been said, the translations would be issued this morning, which, considering that they had only been submitted yesterday, was exceptional, considering that there had been a less than 24-hour turnaround.

In the recommendation on the promotion of the right of peoples to peace (A/HRC/AC/5/L.2), adopted by consensus as orally amended, the Committee designates Committee members Chinsung Chung, Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, Wolfgang Stefan Heinz and Mona Zulficar as members of the Drafting Group; requests the Drafting Group to submit a draft progress report to the sixth session of the Advisory Committee before its submission to the Council at its seventeenth session; requests the Drafting Group to prepare a questionnaire to consult with Member States, civil society, academia and all relevant stakeholders to be distributed after the discussion at the sixth session of the Advisory Committee; and encourages the various stakeholders to contribute to the work under way.

WOLFGANG STEFAN HEINZ, Advisory Committee Vice-Chairperson, introducing L.2, said that in the relevant Council resolution the Advisory Committee was requested to prepare a draft declaration on the right of peoples to peace. In this preliminary draft, the Drafting Group referred to workshops and conclusions from meetings. At the next meeting, the Drafting Group would have a questionnaire to submit and circulate to relevant stakeholders, which was standard procedural practice.

EMMANUEL DECAUX, Advisory Committee Expert, in a general comment said the title should be amended in order to make it in line with L.4 and also with the decision setting up Drafting Groups.

MIGUEL D’ESCOTO BROCKMANN, Advisory Committee Rapporteur, in a general comment, said he wished to stress that there should be a reference to the Human Rights Council resolution where the Council asked the Advisory Committee to submit a draft progress report and draft declaration, and this latter should be included in the text to make it in compliance with the request made by the Council.

WOLFGANG STEFAN HEINZ, Advisory Committee Vice-Chairperson, said the declaration was referred to right in the first paragraph - which was taken from the Human Rights Council decision. He had no problem if Mr. d'Escoto wished to repeat this, but he did not see the need for this to be done, as it was a repetition. If, however, there was strong feeling about this, then the text could be changed.

JOSE ANTONIO BENGOA CABELLO, Advisory Committee Expert, with regard to the same point, said the Drafting Group had two missions - what was in the second paragraph was very important, as it said the Group had to clarify the scope and content of the right, and this should be the core of the work that would be presented in January, as many people, including himself, were not very clear on the content of the right that was being raised here. It would be important for the Drafting Group to bring a series of elements and some background to the discussion that would be held in January in order to clarify how this work would be brought forward.

HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Advisory Committee Expert, in a general comment, said that she was happy with the text as it currently stood. If there were any changes to be made, she would suggest changing it to the full title “Draft Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace.”

PURIFICACION V. QUISUMBING, Advisory Committee Chairperson, said that it made sense to adapt the title.

In the recommendation on the draft principles and guidelines for the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their families (A/HRC/AC/5/L.3), adopted by consensus, the Committee endorses the principles and guidelines submitted by Mr. Sakamoto, as orally revised; submits the revised principles and guidelines to the Human Rights Council for consideration at its fifteenth session as requested; and requests the Human Rights Council to give due consideration to, and to adopt, the revised principles and guidelines.

SHIGEKI SAKAMOTO, Advisory Committee Expert, introducing L.3, said in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 12/7, his task was to finalise a draft set of principles and guidelines for the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their family members in this session, taking into full consideration the views of relevant actors, for submission to the Council by its fifteenth session that would be held in September 2010. He hoped the recommendation would be approved by the Advisory Committee after its consideration. Without the help of the Experts, he could not have finished the principles and guidelines. The dream of the international community was to realise a leprosy-free world. Such a world would not merely have eradicated the disease in a medical sense, but also the prejudice and discrimination caused by it. Only then could the international community say that leprosy had truly been vanquished. In order to eradicate this most deep-rooted prejudice in society, with the cooperation of the distinguished human rights experts, the text should be approved by the Human Rights Council in September, and should make a contribution to improve the human rights situation of the persons affected by leprosy and their families.

In the recommendation on the Drafting Group on enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights (A/HRC/AC/5/L.4), adopted by consensus, the Committee entrusts a Drafting Group with the task of undertaking preparatory work on enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights for consideration by the Advisory Committee; designates the following members of the Advisory Committee as members of the Drafting Group: Shiqiu Chen, Emmanuel Decaux, Latif Huseynov, Vladimir Kartashkin, Purificacion V. Quisumbing, Dheerujlall Setulsingh and Halima Embarek Warzazi; and encourages the Drafting Group to continue its preparatory work, based on the outline presented orally, with a view to submitting further elements to the Advisory Committee at its sixth session.

DHEERUJLALL SEETULSINGH, Advisory Committee Vice-Chairperson, presenting the recommendation on the enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights, said it formally requested the approval of the Human Rights Council for the Advisory Committee to continue its work on this subject, which had been mandated by the Council in resolution 13/23. The Drafting Group would circulate a questionnaire on the issue of the enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights, with the aim of submitting proposals and recommendations to the Council at its nineteenth session.

The members of the Drafting Group had already met to discuss the topic and had divided up tasks and positions, including a rapporteur. They wished to study progress that had been made on this topic since the Vienna Conference and also in the context of the Millennium Development Goals. The Drafting Group would submit some preliminary findings at the next session of the Advisory Committee in January.

HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Advisory Committee Expert, said she wished to take the floor, quite logically, to say that when all the Members of the Committee were authors of a recommendation, then there could be no consensus - it had to be adopted unanimously, and this should be taken note of by the Secretariat.

PURIFICACION V. QUISUMBING, Advisory Committee Chairperson, said that they took note of this.

MIGUEL D’ESCOTO BROCKMANN, Advisory Committee Rapporteur, introducing the draft report, said today was the anniversary of the atom bomb being dropped over Hiroshima, and invited the Advisory Committee to hold a minute of silence in memory of the victims. He then said that over the last five days, they had had a particularly constructive session, with interesting discussions both in plenary and closed meetings. The draft report contained a procedural description of the work up to the seventh meeting held yesterday afternoon. The proceedings of today's meetings would be reflected in the final report, along with the recommendations adopted today. During the session, a variety of interesting topics had been addressed with the active participation of many observers, including State delegations and non-governmental organizations. Tangible progress was made on some of the requests stemming from Human Rights Council resolutions. Despite the usual constraints of time and resources, the collegial working methods had led to fruitful results.

VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN,Advisory Committee Vice-Chairperson, in a general comment on the draft report of the Advisory Committee on the fifth session, thanked Mr. Brockmann and the Secretariat for preparing a good report, which he felt was ready for adoption. However, there were two issues that had not been mentioned in the report and he felt they were important to address in the section called “Any Other Business”.

In one of the plenary sessions and also in private discussion, the Committee had reviewed mechanisms and the way in which the Council operated. He therefore proposed to add a section that said that during the fifth session of the Advisory Committee, its members held an exchange of views with regard to the working methods of the Advisory Committee, taking into account the general functioning of the Human Rights Council. The members of the Committee had held a meeting with the President of the Human Rights Council at this meeting, during which Committee members were able to put forth their views. Furthermore, it was decided that the Committee would continue to explore this issue and would take further decisions at its next session or would request the Chairperson to put forward the views of the Committee to the Council’s President.

The second proposal made by Mr. Kartashkin was to add that the Committee had stated its concern that, in spite of the recommendation of the Chairperson at the fourth session, Ms. Chung had not been invited to partake on the issue of the rights of the elderly and further explanations were requested from the Secretariat. In concluding, he thought that since both of these points had been debated, they deserved to be included in the final report of the fifth session.

LATIF HUSEYNOV, Advisory Committee Expert, in a general comment, said he supported and agreed with what had been said by Mr. Kartashkin, concerning both points, which should be reflected in the report. The Committee should also consider inserting its decision to send a letter to the Chairperson of the Human Rights Council by the Committee's Chairperson concerning the review and methods of work of the Committee. Secondly, Mr. Kartashkin had said that there should be a sentence expressing the Committee's concern about the fact that Ms. Chung had not been invited to the conference as raised, despite the recommendation of the Chair and asking for a clearer explanation for this. The Committee could also add a sentence at the beginning reflecting the fact that the Committee also observed a minute of silence for its late member, Miguel Alfonso Martinez. (As this was indeed included in the text, Mr. Huseynov withdrew this suggestion.) Mr. Huseynov inquired also as to whether the statement made by Olivier de Frouville earlier in the session was made in an individual capacity, or as part of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances.

HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Advisory Committee Expert, in a general comment, congratulated the Rapporteur for his excellent work on the report and hoped that the Committee would continue to progress in its important mandates.

MONA ZULFICAR, Advisory Committee Expert, in a general comment, thanked the Rapporteur for the draft report, and confirmed her agreement with the proposals made by colleagues, as it was very important that the Advisory Committee had taken the initiative and discussed its methods of work in an attempt of self-evaluation, self-critique and appraisal in order to improve its work and contribution, and its decision to write and make its contribution to the President of the Human Rights Council before the Working Group on reform began its work in September. The issue of the invitation of Ms. Chung was also an important matter, and was a matter of principle for the Committee, and it should express its concern at the events that had occurred.

DHEERUJLALL SEETULSINGH, Advisory Committee Vice-Chairperson, in a general comment, said the Committee members had requested a closed meeting before the end of the day to discuss certain issues, and said that a number of the issues raised were in-house matters, and should be discussed in private, following which the report could be adopted. The Committee should discuss whether to include these matters in the report.

EMMANUEL DECAUX, Advisory Committee Expert, said a private meeting would be the best way to discuss these issues, but suggested that the report be adopted first, in order to free up the observers and other stakeholders.

JEAN ZIEGLER, Advisory Committee Expert, in a general comment, said that he supported the proposal for a private meeting. Also, as Mr. Kartashkin rightly pointed out, the Committee should continue to work on highlighting how the Council’s working mechanisms could be reformed. In this regard, he was wondering what kind of deadline had been given to produce a document on this particular topic and he was hoping that the Secretariat could give further information on the schedule of work.

He added that the timing of involvement was very important. States were planning to request that the Advisory Committee work on the issue of reforms. The delegation of Switzerland, for instance, had informed him that they would be making a proposal that the Committee address the issue of how to improve working mechanisms and the Committee therefore needed to be prepared to tackle this particular request from the Human Rights Council.

PURIFICACION V. QUISUMBING, Advisory Committee Chairperson, in concluding remarks, said that the fifth session of the Advisory Committee had seen the accomplishment of another concrete output, namely the endorsement of the draft set of guidelines and principles on the elimination of discrimination against all persons affected by leprosy and their family members, which would be presented before the Council at its upcoming fifteenth session. In this regard, the Committee had strived to achieve an implementation-oriented tool in line with the Committee’s mandate as detailed in Council Resolution 5/1.

During this session, the Committee had also benefited from increasingly interactive debates with various stakeholders on its ongoing mandates, despite the challenge of many absences due to the summer holiday season. Moreover, the Committee had begun to tackle new issues stemming from Council requests, in particular on the right of peoples to peace and the enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights. It was collectively hoped that discussions in the next session of the Advisory Committee would continue to be enriched by exchanges and inputs from different stakeholders, both governmental and from within civil society.

In addition, the Committee had also had the privilege of listening to the newly elected President of the Human Rights Council. Ambassador Phuangketkeow provided useful insights on the Council review process, and informed the Committee of the Council’s interest to receive inputs and reflections from different stakeholders, including its own mechanisms. Ms. Quisumbing concluded by encouraging all the members of different Drafting Groups to nurture their contacts in the international-sessional period and she looked forward to welcoming everyone again next January, for a session that promised to have a particularly charged programme of work.

Finally, she added one point on the value of yesterday’s closed meeting. She suggested that the Committee make it a point at each session to hold a closed meeting at the beginning and end of the session, and possibly one in the middle, dependent on the need. There was certainly a necessity to convene a private meeting today, for example, to discuss next steps in preparation for the October review meeting.


For use of the information media; not an official record

AC10/018E