HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE OPENS EIGHTH SESSION

The Human Rights Council Advisory Committee today opened its eighth session, hearing statements from the President of the Human Rights Council and the Director of Human Rights Council and Special Procedures Division of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Committee discussed and adopted its agenda and programme of work for the session and began deliberations on the second item on its agenda, namely requests addressed to the Advisory Committee stemming from the Human Rights Council resolutions, taking up the draft declaration on the right of peoples to peace as well as a preliminary study on promoting human rights and fundamental freedoms through a better understanding of traditional values of humankind.

Laura Dupuy Lasserre, President of the Human Rights Council, said that the interaction between the Human Rights Council and the Advisory Committee should improve on the basis of the new practical adjustments introduced after the review process. Ms. Dupuy Lasserre invited observer delegations to interact with the members of the Committee and provide inputs and comments on the promotion of the rights of farmers and peasants; the detailed study on serious malnutrition and childhood diseases; and the report on international cooperation on human rights.

Bacre Ndiaye, Director of Human Rights Council and Special Procedures Division of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, noted the adoption of the Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training, which first elements had been elaborated by this Committee, an important reference and tool for action, which provided guidance for the implementation of quality human rights education and training initiatives at the national level. Mr. Ndaiye reiterated the Secretariat’s full support to the work of the Committee.

Taking up the second item on its agenda, namely requests addressed to the Advisory Committee stemming from the Human Rights Council resolutions, the Committee started discussions on the draft declaration on the right of peoples to peace. Wolfgang S. Heinz, Committee Expert and Rapporteur of the Drafting Group, said that a new draft resolution on the right of peoples to peace would be submitted to the Council. The new draft declaration focused on core standards and included both positive and negative peace, including also elements on education, environment, victims and vulnerable groups. Mr. Heinz hoped that these discussions would contribute to the development of crucial ideas, a coherent and concise approach; and hoped that the Council would take note of the draft declaration and set up a mechanism of the Council to enter a dialogue among members so that the draft declaration would reach the General Assembly.

On the preliminary study on traditional values of humankind, Vladimir Kartashkin, Committee Expert and Rapporteur of the Drafting Group, recalled that the Advisory Committee had been asked to prepare a study on such traditional values, as dignity, freedom, responsibility and how they could enhance the promotion of human rights. Despite considerable divisions in the Council and limited time, Mr. Kartashkin had attempted to develop a preliminary document that could serve as a basis for discussion. Mr. Kartashkin noted the criticism put forward, including on the question on whether traditional values were always valuable and on the prominent role played by religion. The real decision to be made was how to proceed to meet the requirements of the Council, including the many conflicting views held by Member States.

The following Experts of the Advisory Committee took the floor: Mona Zulficar, Dheerujlall Seetulsingh, Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, Ahmer Bilal Soofi, Jean Ziegler, Victor Manuel Rodriguez Recia, José Antonio Bengoa Cabello, Anantonia Reyes Prado, Vladimir Kartashkin, Shiqiu Chen, Halima Embarek Warzazi, Shigeki Sakamoto, and Wolfgang Stefan Heinz.

Victor Manuel Rodriguez Recia, Member of the United Nations Subcommittee on the Prohibition on Torture, also addressed the Committee.

Speaking today were the following Member States: Cuba, Tunisia, Uruguay, Costa Rica, Spain, Pakistan, Argentina, and Russian Federation. The following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: Peace Messenger Cities, Japanese Workers Committee for Human Rights, International Association of Democratic Lawyers, The Japan Federation of Bar Associations, United Network of Young Peacebuildiers, Conscious and Peace Tax international and the Indian Council of South America.

At the beginning of the session, the Advisory Committee observed a minute of silence for all victims of human rights violations around the world. The Committee also observed a minute of silence in honour of Purificacion V. Quisumbing, one of its members, who passed away on 2 December 2011.

The next meeting of the Advisory Committee will be held on Tuesday, 21 February at 10 a.m., when it is scheduled to continue its discussion on traditional values of human kind and then take up follow-up to the report on the right to food.

Opening Statements

LAURA DUPUEY LASSERRE, President of the Human Rights Council, thanked the Committee for their support for the declaration on human rights education and training, recently adopted by the General Assembly. The interaction between the Human Rights Council and the Advisory Committee should improve on the basis of the new practical adjustments introduced after the review process, as stated on resolution 16/21. This was the first time that the Advisory Committee met before the Council’s session and Ms. Dupuy Lasserre invited observer delegations to interact with the members of the Committee and provide inputs and comments on the three topics which the Committee was expected to prepare for consideration by the Council: the study on the promotion of the rights of farmers and peasants; the detailed study on serious malnutrition and childhood diseases; and the report on international cooperation on human rights. The Committee would also continue with its work on other mandates, including a declaration on the right to peace and a study on the promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms through a better understanding of the traditional values of humankind.

It was also expected that members of the Council would contribute to the work of the Committee by indicating thematic priorities and sharing the essence of debates in the Council, promoting a better complementarity between both organs. The Advisory Committee had proposed some themes to the Council, including youth, IT and discrimination against the poor and marginalised groups in access to justice. As a think-tank and provider of specialised knowledge on thematic issues on human rights, it was crucial that the Committee maintained a close relationship with all stakeholders, including civil society, human rights societies, and other United Nations agencies concerned with the themes addressed by the Advisory Committee in order to promote a solid basis for the progressive development of international law.

BACRE NDIAYE, Director of Human Rights Council and Special Procedures Division of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that last December the General Assembly adopted the Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training, which first elements had been elaborated by this Committee. The Office of the High Commissioner would disseminate this declaration, an important reference and tool for action that provided guidance for the implementation of quality human rights education and training initiatives at the national level. With regards to the global food crisis, the Office continued to contribute to the development of the common approach to prevent and respond to food crises, including in the Sahel. At this session the Committee was expected to finalise studies on discrimination in the context of the right to food, linkages between malnutrition and childhood diseases and the advancement of the rights of peasants and other people working in rural areas. The Committee would also continue its work on rural women and their right to food and Mr. Ndiaye drew attention to the upcoming report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food.

The Committee had been mandated to prepare a study on human rights and terrorist hostage-taking and the Office had contributed to the organization of a panel discussion at the sixteenth regular session of the Council and prepared a summary report which highlighted the primary responsibility of States to promote and protect human rights for all under their jurisdiction. The Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity would be attending the session of this Committee to exchange views on the right of people to international solidarity. The Council in its resolution 18/5 requested the High Commissioner to organise a workshop in support of its mandate, implication, role and impact of international solidarity in the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals and the Right to Development, and several members of the Advisory Committee would be invited to attend. Pursuant resolutions 6/30 and 7/9, the Advisory Committee was encouraged to integrate the rights of women and people with disabilities.

Draft Declaration on the Promotion of the Right of Peoples to Peace

WOLFGANG STEFAN HEINZ, Committee Expert and Rapporteur of the Drafting Group, said that a new draft resolution on the right of peoples to peace would be submitted to the Council as stipulated in resolution 17/16. The new draft declaration focused on core standards and included both positive and negative elements of peace, including also elements on education, environment, victims and vulnerable groups. Among civil society activities, a number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) had held workshops attended by members of the Committee. Mr. Heinz welcomed the support expressed recently by the Ibero-American Summit held in Paraguay and attended by the Spanish Parliament. The drafting committee had maintained a comprehensive approach while developing a concise document; maintaining a focus on both positive and negative peace. In particular, peace education was seen as a necessary condition. Regarding implementation, States should strengthen the role of the United Nations in taking effective measures to prevent violations of this right which might threaten international peace and security. The Council should set up a body to continue to work on this issue and report to the relevant stakeholders. Mr. Heinz hoped that these discussions would contribute to the development of crucial ideas, a coherent and concise approach; and hoped that the Council would take note of the draft declaration and set up a mechanism of the Council to enter a dialogue among members so that the draft declaration would reach the General Assembly.

The progress report of the Drafting Group on the right of peoples to peace (A/HRC/AC/8/2) includes in its annex the Draft Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace.

MONA ZULFICAR, Committee Expert, said that international momentum demonstrated the interest of governments and civil society which intensively supported this initiative and the agenda of the right of peace, moving towards the codification of the right at the international level.

DHEERUJLALL SEETULSINGH, Committee Expert, referred to the African Charter of Human Rights and, in relation to the comments of the drafting group, with regards to jurisdiction, suggested the need for further clarification. There were difficulties in establishing a universal definition of refugee, since it was States who decided on this status. Mr. Seetulsingh emphasized the difficulties of establishing a monitoring mechanism and underlined the need for concrete proposals for implementation.

LAURENCE BOISSON DE CHAZOURNES, Committee Expert, indicated there was a clear link between existing human rights instruments, including the covenants, and the right to peace, which presupposed civil, cultural, social and political rights. The principle should include positive and negative aspects of peace. With regards to the right to development, Ms. Boisson de Chazournes underlined the importance of clearly establishing the fundamental principle, the right to the environment, and addressing climate change, equity and the question of historical contribution, financing and technology transfers.

AHMER BILAL SOOFI, Committee Expert, said that the reference to nuclear weapons in article 1 in relation to the reference to threat to the use of force was too specific, and that it should be included under article 3 in relation to nuclear disarmament.

JEAN ZIEGLER, Committee Expert, emphasized the importance of addressing the issue of refugees and referred to the categories established in the 1951 Refugee Convention. Mr. Ziegler warned against a strict wording of a definition and recalled the principle of law necessity which could allow for certain offences, effectively arising from a violation forced by circumstances, such as an ambulance running past a red light. Mr. Ziegler noted with concern the growth of racial politics in Europe, in particular Spain, France and Switzerland, and emphasized the importance of including a definition which allowed for the inclusion and protection of hunger refugees.

VICTOR MANUEL RODRIGUEZ RECIA, Member of the United Nations Subcommittee on the Prohibition on Torture, spoke about the advantages of the Declaration vis a vis social peace and avoiding structural conflict. In particular reference to article 11 on vulnerable groups, Mr. Rodriguez stressed in the viewpoint of the Subcommittee the work of civil society in the Declaration of Santiago, the recognition of the right of vulnerable people in the development of active peace. Furthermore, Mr. Rodriguez noted the reference to indigenous people, yet the article should be more inclusive, including other vulnerable groups such as people deprived of liberty or those victims of structural violence.

JOSE ANTONIO BENGOA CABELLO, Committee Expert, wondered what the contribution of this declaration would be to concrete instances of conflict and violence. Mr. Bengoa Cabello emphasized the importance of civil society participation and underlined the importance of a mechanism capable of avoiding politicization and which would encourage the discussion of threats to peace in a context much less politicized that other fora such as the Security Council.

VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Committee Expert, said that as time was pressing to consider other items on the agenda he would focus only on one issue. Other statements and references had been made to the fact that it was one matter to talk about international law and the state of affairs on the other hand. It was not only the case that international law should be viewed as a foundation or cornerstone in dealing with other problems and there had been appeals to Mr. Heinz. Recognising norms of international law was a different matter that they did not always correspond to justice. International law was always developing amidst international relations which outstripped international law, but it was a different matter when a study was carried out. Studies should mark the path for the development of international law and provide markers for the solution of acute problems.

ANANTONIA REYES PRADO, Committee Expert, concerning the human right to peace and in relation to articles 6 and 2 on private military companies and human security, stressed the importance of citizens’ security. In the context of widespread violence and insecurity, a preventive approach was needed. In particular, Ms. Reyes Prado underlined the importance of taking into account juvenal security and of including the issue of citizens security always in relation to the human right to peace.

MONA ZUFICAR, Committee Expert, said with regards to article 2 of the declaration, concerning crimes of war targeting women, a previous progress report had made explicit references, in particular to the Security Council resolution on women, peace and security. When States were unable to prevent these crimes from occurring, they should call on the United Nations to help fulfil this responsibility; this was consistent with States’ responsibility towards peacekeeping and participation on this kind of effort through the United Nations. Declarations began a process of codification of the right to peace in international human rights law, but they should not only be acceptable to the international community to put together the common denominator, effective monitoring mechanisms were also necessary.

Cuba emphasised the importance of the right to peace for the Council. The right to peace was a sacred right in which promotion and implementation was a primary obligation of States. Tunisia said it had listened carefully to the discussions on the right of peoples to peace and was willing to contribute to this debate; it supported the idea of submitting the draft declaration to the Council and setting up an intergovernmental group to contribute to this process. Tunisia stressed the importance of the issue of refugees. Uruguay noted with satisfaction the proposed draft, especially the references to education and decent work, but reiterated previous comments concerning national security and human security. Uruguay noted that these were linked and national security should reinforce human security; and reiterated the point made by Ms. Prado with regards to citizens’ security and prevention. The contribution of women to peace should be noted and their participation should be promoted, including fighting discrimination and addressing violence against women.

Costa Rica thanked experts for the discussion on the subject of the right to peace and agreed with Ms. Zulficar that this was a moment to put this subject on the international agenda. Costa Rica agreed with the Committee in that there was room for improvement in light of an intergovernmental discussion, this implied questions concerning the best monitoring mechanisms. This decision would be taken when the Human Rights Council decided to establish an open ended governmental working group to follow up on the draft declaration. Spain suggested moving from the level ideas to addressing concrete legal issues, translating into actual practices which would have an impact on the field of human rights. Spain would not rule out the possibility of discussion of this issue within an ad hoc forum, and looked forward to gathering consensus in the Council. Pakistan attached great importance to the right of peace, addressing the root causes of issues which threatened peace and security, respecting sovereignty, refraining to act in any way opposed to the principles of the United Nations, and implementing United Nations resolutions to ensure peace and security. Pakistan took note of the draft declaration and thanked the Committee for integrating some of the recommendations made by delegations during previous discussions. Given the early stages of discussion within the United Nations, Pakistan believed it was premature to include references to the responsibility to protect in the draft declaration.

Argentina, with regards to vulnerable groups, suggested a concrete reference to the right to justice, truth and no repetition; further comments would be put forward by Argentina during intergovernmental discussions. The Russian Federation said it had supported and continued to support the right of peoples to peace as a third generation human right and looked forward to a discussion at the intergovernmental level. Human rights, security and peace were pillars of order, and full compliance with human rights was not possible unless provision was made for peace and development. There was an ambiguous interpretation of the notion of responsibility to protect and Russian Federation would not see the Council going beyond that interpretation.

Peace Messenger Cities, in a joint statement, said that the draft declaration on the right to peace was more appropriate since it covered both individual and collective dimensions; the human right to peace would be the most appropriate title for this draft declaration. With regards to article 13 concerning obligation, it should include articles of the Santiago Declaration with regards to the establishment of a working group under the General Assembly to monitor its implementation. A new special procedure mandate holder should be established with the duty to monitor the protection of the right to peace. The Santiago Declaration reflected best practices for this special procedures mandate holders. Japanese Workers’ Committee for Human Rights noted that the Japanese Constitution enshrined the right to live in peace. The right to live in peace was a concrete life as noted by the Nagoya High Court’s decision. The NGO welcomed the paragraph on peace zones and nuclear weapons free zone in article 3 of the draft declaration.

International Association of Democratic Lawyers noted the importance of implementation within the United Nations in order to ensure States’ compliance with international obligations. The Japan Federation of Bar Associations welcomed the addition of an anti-discrimination clause and proposed an additional clause in article 13 covering the implementation, including judicial remedies. The right to peace was not only an obligation to be fulfilled morally but should be a legally enforceable right. United Network of Young Peacebuildiers noted that the term resolution of conflict and the transformation of conflict were very specific and emphasized transformation of conflict before and failing that, resolution of conflict. Conscious and Peace Tax international said that the draft constituted a significant improvement from earlier documents and hoped that consensus could be achieved; the right of contentious objection to military service should be separated from other issues. Finally the Indian Council of South America noted the failure of Canada to implement the treaties which indigenous peoples held with the British Crown, and emphasised the importance of addressing the issue of monitoring through conflict prevention.

SHIQIU CHEN, Committee Expert, said this was a very important subject and would allow everyone to live in a world of peace. Unfortunately, today the realisation of the right to peace was far from being achieved. At present, even though work was carried out in this direction, it should be remembered that the Advisory Committee should serve as researchers and thinkers and could make a contribution that would be welcomed in this sphere. Several colleagues referred to the draft declaration; at this stage this represented a statement of political will. These were ideas which might sound a bit empty but were still of vital importance. Also, this type of declaration did contain important words and the declaration should include operational ideas and implementable substances. Implementation was vital and the ideas should be made operational and down to earth. At present article 13 included six paragraphs but remained hollow and it was hard to put them in practice, perhaps the issue of implementation could be addressed in a more detailed way. The rights and obligations should be made more specific, so that implementation could be monitored.

WOLFGANG STEFAN HEINZ, Committee Expert and Rapporteur of the Drafting Group, in concluding remarks, indicated that the language of the Refugee Convention was currently in use but the inclusion of a notion of hunger refugee could be considered. With regards of implementation, monitoring and impact, Mr. Heinz noted that this discussion on the draft declaration would continue within the Council and the General Assembly and Mr. Heinz noted that time would have to pass before an impact in the real world could be seen. Further discussions within the Council would be necessary, as would be the establishment of a monitoring body. At this stage, the objective concerned the discussion on a common understanding of the standards. The fields of international security and peacekeeping were very broad. The priority was to advance an understanding of the human rights dimension of the right to peace. However, Mr. Heinz hoped that this approach would help advance the agenda of peace. Peace had not been addressed as a specific topic as part of the main human rights issues. Eventually Mr. Heinz hoped that a practical impact could be achieved. Finally, Mr. Heinz hoped that during the discussion within an open ended intergovernmental working group, the spirit to find common ground and momentum would be maintained, and there would be no fall back into political confrontation.

Traditional Values of Humankind

VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Rapporteur of the Drafting Group on Traditional Values of Humankind, recalled that the Advisory Committee had been asked to prepare a study on such traditional values, as dignity, freedom, responsibility and how they could enhance the promotion of human rights. Despite considerable divisions in the Council and limited time, Mr. Kartashkin had attempted to develop a preliminary document that could serve as a basis for discussion. Mr. Kartashkin noted the criticism put forward, including on the question on whether traditional values were always valuable and on the prominent role played by religion. The real decision to be made was how to proceed to meet the requirements of the Council, including the many conflicting views held by Member States. The document noted viewpoints which had led to different interpretations, for example the relationship between responsibility and obligation. When addressing traditional values listed on the Council’s resolution, it was important to wonder whether to go beyond this list. For example, with regards to democracy, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action had emphasised the importance of democracy and its strong linkages to human rights. Human rights were universal in nature and this universalization should be promoted; the report also noted the convergence of international, regional and national standards. Respect for different civilisations, customs and the diversity of the world played an important role in this process of universalization.

The preliminary study on Promoting Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms through a Better Understanding of Traditional Values of Humankind can be found (here).

HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Committee Expert, referring to criticism by non-governmental organizations (NGOs), noted that there were organizations which were not ready to accept differences among civilisations. Respect for the work of NGOs was important, even when it was not always possible to agree with them. In order to have a fruitful discussion it was not possible to begin with preconceptions. Ms. Warzazi indicated that mutual respect had been part of natural rights traditions of many civilisations. For this reason, it was vital for human rights education to include examples drawn for diverse civilizational and cultural traditions.

SHIGEKI SAKAMOTO, Committee Expert, said it was important to take a cautious approach to this sensitive topic. There was as of yet no accepted definition of the term traditional values of humankind. The preliminary study suggested that human rights arose from the dignity of the individual and its responsible behaviour, including respect of the state, society and other people. However the promotion of human rights could not be conditional upon responsible behaviour. The study also emphasised the primacy of traditional values. In this regard, Mr. Sakamoto asked when did traditional values of humankind become jus cogens of international law?

MONA ZULFICAR, Committee Expert, said that the basic challenge was to find a way to make full use of traditional values in order to promote the implementation of the universal and fundamental human rights contained in the Declaration and other human rights documents; in particular, for the purpose of better implementation, promotion and effectiveness. Religions should be respected insofar as they did not contradict human rights and freedoms. Female genital mutilation was an African tradition and had nothing to do with religion. It was a harmful practice and a clear violation to human rights.

WOLFGANG STEFAN HEINZ, Committee Expert, expressed several concerns about the paper. The preliminary report did not engage academic literature and lacked references to authoritative works. This had nothing to do with the existence of different opinions but with methodology; the transparent use of multidisciplinary sources was necessary. Conceptually, several points were not very clear and the discussion of traditional values of humankind was inconsistent. A perspective of victims of human rights was absent from the report. Finally, rather than a conclusive synthesis, a number of controversial statements, including that human rights should not contradict traditional values, had been made. This could open the door to controversy and undermined efforts towards the codification of human rights.


For use of the information media; not an official record

AC12/002E