Briefing note, 24 February 1998

24 February 1998


John Mills, media officer for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that Mrs. Mary Robinson had issued a statement this morning expressing her grave concern at the decision by the Federal Court of Malaysia which last week brought down a ruling in which it refused to accept the United Nations' claims of immunity for the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Mr. Param Cumaraswamy (Malaysia). Copies of the statement would be in the press room in the next few minutes.

Mr. Mills said that also this morning, the High Commissioner had gladly accepted a suggestion from her staff and was sending a letter of congratulations to the Secretary-General on his efforts in Iraq, expressing the hopes of her colleagues that the outcome of the efforts would be accepted by the Security Council later today.

Next week, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) would meet. The first item on their agenda would be the election of a new chairman following the retirement of Professor Michael Banton. A detailed background press release was available in the press room.

Mr. Mills said that he was asked at the last briefing whether or not the High Commissioner considered war to be a violation of human rights. He had discussed this with Mrs. Robinson. Obviously, there was no simple answer. For example, the United Nations Charter both committed the Organization to avoid war and provided a legal basis for using armed force. That was the reality of the world.

From a human rights perspective, Mr. Mills said there were a few points he would make: First was that people had a right to peace. It was recognized in the 1984 Declaration by the General Assembly on the Right of Peoples to Peace which committed States to take all possible measures to avoid war. This was exactly what the Secretary-General was doing over the weekend. Second, human rights was about idealism, and about setting high standards in human behaviour which would be realized over time. So wars, even justifiable wars, were to be regretted as a step backwards in realizing human rights. Third, there was a tight linkage between human rights violations and war. He recalled that the High Commissioner in her speech in Oxford had said that "today's human rights violations were the causes of tomorrow's conflicts." All armed conflicts involved violations of the human rights of civilians. There was no such thing as a clean war.

Mr. Mills said that there was no simple or clear-cut answer to this important question. The High Commissioner would hope that the world's understanding of human rights will arrive at a point where it is accepted that war is a violation of human rights. In the meantime, the view of the Office was that the international community would benefit by addressing earlier and more effectively human rights violations before they resulted in conflict.