Human Rights Council adopts 18 texts, creates mandate on the right to development

AFTERNOON
 
Renews Mandates on Somalia, Slavery, Use of Mercenaries, Older Persons, Health, Water and Sanitation, and Indigenous Peoples
 
GENEVA (29 September 2016) - The Human Rights Council this afternoon started taking action on draft texts, adopting 17 resolutions and a Presidential Statement, including creating the mandate of a Special Rapporteur on the right to development.  The Council extended the mandates on human rights in Somalia, contemporary forms of slavery, safe drinking water and sanitation, the right to the highest attainable levels of physical and mental health, the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights, the human rights of older persons, and on the rights of indigenous peoples.
 
Other texts related to the safety of journalists; technical assistance to Yemen; unaccompanied migrant children and adolescents; preventable mortality and morbidity of children under 5 years of age; local government and human rights; national human rights institutions and the promotion and protection of human rights; equitable international order; human rights and indigenous peoples; the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights; and the reports of the Advisory Committee.
 
In a resolution adopted by a vote of 34 in favour, two against and 11 abstentions, the Council appointed for a period of three years a Special Rapporteur on the right to development to, inter alia, contribute to the work of the Working Group on the Right to Development and to the promotion, protection and fulfilment of the right to development in the context of the coherent and integrated implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
 
The Council decided to extend, for a period of three years, the mandates of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences; the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health; the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples; and the Independent Expert on the enjoyment of all human rights by older persons.
 
By a vote of 32 in favour, 13 against and two abstentions, the Council extended the mandate of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights for another three years.  It extended the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation for a period of three years, by a vote of 42 in favour, one against and four abstentions.
 
Taking action on resolutions under its agenda item on technical assistance and capacity building in the field of human rights, the Council extended the mandate of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Somalia for a period of one year. 
 
On Yemen, the Council requested the High Commissioner to provide substantive technical assistance and advice, including in the areas of accountability and legal support to enable the National Commission to complete its investigatory work concerning allegations of violations and abuses committed by all relevant parties in Yemen; and to present an oral update at the Council’s thirty-fourth session, and a written report on violations and abuses since September 2014 at its thirty-sixth session.
 
Concerning the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, adopted by a vote of 30 in favour, 12 against, and five abstentions, the Council underlined that attempts to overthrow legitimate governments by force disrupted the democratic and constitutional order, the legitimate exercise of power and the full enjoyment of human rights, and urged States to continue their efforts, through enhanced international cooperation, towards the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order
 
The Council requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a report on available mechanisms concerned with ensuring the safety of journalists, and to submit to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-ninth session; and to organize, prior to the thirty-ninth session of the Human Rights Council, in close collaboration with the World Health Organization, an expert workshop to discuss experiences in preventing mortality and morbidity of children under 5 years of age, with a particular focus on the implementation of the technical guidance.
 
In the resolution on the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights, the Council requested the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to organize, prior to the Council’s thirty-seventh session, an expert workshop to discuss the role and contribution of civil society organizations, academia, national human rights institutions and other relevant stakeholders in the prevention of human rights abuses, and to present the summary report to the Council at its thirty-ninth session.
 
The Council decided to convene at its thirty-fifth session a panel discussion on the theme “Unaccompanied migrant children and adolescents and human rights”, and requested the Advisory Committee to submit a final report on the global issue of unaccompanied migrant children and adolescents and human rights to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-sixth session.  It further decided to convene on the same day as the organizational meeting for its thirty-sixth session a panel discussion on the role of local government in the promotion and protection of human rights.
 
With regard to human rights and indigenous peoples, the Council requested the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to prepare a study on good practices and challenges in business and in access to financial services by indigenous peoples and to present it to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-sixth session.  It also decided to hold, at its thirty-sixth session, a half-day panel discussion on the commemoration of the tenth anniversary of the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, with a special focus on challenges and good practices in achieving the ends of the Declaration.
 
In a Presidential Statement on the reports of the Advisory Committee, the Council took note of the reports of the Advisory Committee on its sixteenth and seventeenth sessions, and its research proposals.
 
The Council encouraged Member States to establish and strengthen effective, independent and pluralistic national human rights institutions, and to promptly and thoroughly investigate any cases of alleged reprisal or intimidation against their staff.
 
Introducing draft resolutions and amendments were the United Kingdom, Austria, Cuba, Brazil, Ukraine, El Salvador, the Republic of Korea, Germany, Kyrgyzstan, Ireland, Mexico, Venezuela on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, Australia, and Sudan.   
 
Yemen and Somalia spoke as concerned countries.

Speaking in general comments were United Kingdom, Slovenia on behalf of the European Union, Paraguay, China, Namibia, India, Kyrgyzstan, Cuba, South Africa on behalf of the African Group, and the United Kingdom.
 
Speaking in an explanation of the vote before or after the vote were Slovenia on behalf of the European Union, Mexico, Kyrgyzstan, France, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and India.
 
The Council will next meet on Friday, 30 September at 9 a.m., to continue taking action on resolutions and decisions, before closing its thirty-third session.
 
Action on Text under the Agenda Item on Organizational and Procedural Matters
 
Action on Presidential Statement on Reports of the Advisory Committee
 
In a presidential statement (A/HRC/33/L.1) on the reports of the Advisory Committee, the Council takes note of the reports of the Advisory Committee on its sixteenth and seventeenth sessions, and notes that the Advisory Committee has made certain research proposals.
 
Action on Resolutions under the Agenda Item on the Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, including the Right to Development
 
Action on Resolution on the Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, including its Causes and Consequences
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.2) on the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences, adopted without a vote, the Council renews the mandate of the Special Rapporteur for a period of three years; decides that the Special Rapporteur shall continue to examine and report on all contemporary forms of slavery and slavery-like practices, but in particular those defined in the Slavery Convention of 1926 and the Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery of 1956; and requests the Special Rapporteur to participate in relevant international dialogues and policy forums related to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, particularly the implementation of Goal 8.
 
United Kingdom, introducing draft resolution L.2, said that tackling modern slavery was vital.  One case was one too many, but minimum estimates said that between 21 and 45 million people were still victims of slavery.  All partners were called on to stop this terrible scourge.  The draft resolution would renew the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery and also update that mandate.
 
Action on Resolution on the Safety of Journalists
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.6) on the safety of journalists, adopted without a vote, the Council  condemns unequivocally all attacks and violence against journalists and media workers; calls upon States to create and maintain, in law and in practice, a safe and enabling environment for journalists to perform their work independently and without undue interference; and also calls upon States to develop and implement strategies for combatting impunity for attacks and violence against journalists.  The Council further urges States to bring their laws, policies and practices fully into compliance with their obligations and commitments under international human rights law; invites States to share information on a voluntary basis on the status of investigations into attacks and violence against journalists; and requests the High Commissioner to prepare a report with an overview of available mechanisms concerned with ensuring the safety of journalists, and to submit it to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-ninth session.
 
Germany, introducing draft resolution L.6, said that more than 1,200 journalists had been killed since 1992 as a direct result of their work.  Journalists being intimidated into silence deprived all people in society of access to important information.  Since the Council last considered the issue, there had been little improvement for journalists facing risks to their safety on the ground.  Germany reminded that resolutions offered little in the way of protection unless they were matched with national action.  The resolution included a wide range of new elements, including condemning specific attacks on women journalists.  It also called upon States to protect in law and in practice the confidentiality of journalists’ sources.
 
United Kingdom, speaking in a general comment, noted that the resolution on the safety of journalists highlighted the important issue of freedom of expression, and tackled attacks and violence against journalists.  The reference to the right to privacy was in line with international standards.  Every person had the right to protection from arbitrary and unlawful intervention into his or her privacy.  The United Kingdom reaffirmed that the right to privacy offline had to also be protected online.
 
Action on Resolution on the Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable International Order
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.7) on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, adopted by a vote of 30 in favour, 12 against and five abstentions, the Council reaffirms the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in particular the principle that the will of the people, as expressed through periodic and genuine elections, shall be the basis of government authority, as well as the right to choose representatives freely through periodic and genuine elections, which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures; underlines that attempts to overthrow legitimate governments by force disrupt the democratic and constitutional order, the legitimate exercise of power and the full enjoyment of human rights; urges States to continue their efforts, through enhanced international cooperation, towards the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order; and requests the Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order to submit to the Human Rights Council, at its thirty-sixth session, a report on the implementation of the present resolution.
 
The result of the vote was as follows:
 
In favour (30): Algeria, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Burundi, China, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Kyrgyzstan, Maldives, Mongolia, Morocco, Namibia, Nigeria, Panama, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, and Viet Nam.
 
Against (12): Albania, Belgium, France, Germany, Latvia, Netherlands, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and United Kingdom.
 
Abstentions (5): Georgia, Kenya, Mexico, Paraguay, and Togo.
 
Cuba, introducing draft resolution L.7, said that the resolution condemned attempts to expel from power legitimate authorities.  An equitable international order was necessary for the promotion and protection of human rights.  Cuba expressed hopes that the initiative could be supported by an overwhelming majority of the Human Rights Council.
 
Slovenia, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote on behalf of the European Union, expressed reservations about the draft resolution.  The European Union would call for a vote and the European Union Member States of the Council would vote against the resolution.  The way forward could include discontinuation of the mandate.
 
Action on Resolution on the Use of Mercenaries as a Means of Violating Human Rights and Impeding the Exercise of the Right of Peoples to Self-Determination
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.8) on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination, adopted by a vote of 32 in favour, 13 against and two abstentions, the Council requeststhe Working Group to continue to monitor mercenaries and mercenary-related activities in all their forms and manifestations, and private military and security companies, in different parts of the world, including instances of protection provided by Governments to individuals involved in mercenary activities, and to continue to update the database of individuals convicted of mercenary activities; renews, for a period of three years, the mandate of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights; requests all States to exercise the utmost vigilance against any kind of recruitment, training, hiring or financing of mercenaries; and calls upon all States that have not yet become a party to the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries to consider taking the necessary action to do so.  The Council requests the Working Group to consult States, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations and other relevant civil society actors in the implementation of the present resolution, and to report its findings to the General Assembly at its seventy-second session and to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-sixth session.
 
The result of the vote was as follows:
 
In favour (32): Algeria, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Burundi, China, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Maldives, Mongolia, Morocco, Namibia, Nigeria, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Togo, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, and Viet Nam.
 
Against (13): Albania, Belgium, France, Georgia, Germany, Latvia, Netherlands, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and United Kingdom.
 
Abstentions (2): Ghana, and Mexico.
 
Cuba, introducing draft resolution L.8, explained that the phenomenon of mercenaries had to be dealt with by the Human Rights Council.  The ongoing practices of recruitment and the use of mercenaries violated the principles of the United Nations Charter.  The draft resolution condemned the impunity of those involved in mercenary activities; and it called on States to hold them accountable, to remain vigilant and to take the necessary measures to prevent such practices.  There could be no disregard for the relationship between mercenaries and private military and security companies.
 
Slovenia, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote on behalf of the European Union, regretted that the draft resolution L.8 brought confusion between separate issues.  Mercenaries’ activities could not be placed on the same footing as activities of private military and security companies.  The issue of regulation and oversight was well covered in other processes.  The European Union had suggested to raise standards for the operations of private military and security companies.  It regretted that those proposals were not taken on board.  In light of those concerns, the European Union would call for a vote on the draft resolution and would vote against it.
 
Action on Resolution on the Human Rights of Older Persons
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.9) on the human rights of older persons, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to extend the mandate of the Independent Expert on the enjoyment of all human rights by older persons for a period of three years to continue to assess the implementation of national, regional and international standards relevant to the rights of older persons and to identify, exchange and promote best practices related to the promotion and protection of these rights, as well as to report on developments, challenges and protection gaps in the realization of the rights of older persons.  The Council also requests the Independent Expert to integrate a gender and disability perspective throughout the work of the mandate, and to address multiple, intersecting and aggravated forms of discrimination faced by older persons; and to work in close coordination, while avoiding unnecessary duplication, with the Open-ended Working Group on Ageing, other special procedures and subsidiary organs of the Human Rights Council, relevant United Nations bodies and the treaty bodies.
 
Brazil, introducing draft resolution L.9, said that the number of older persons in the world was growing, and because of aging of the global population, the human rights of older persons needed to be tackled.
 
Argentina, also introducing draft resolution L.9, said that the mandate would continue to raise international standards and promote good practices when it came to the rights of older persons.  The mandate would also raise awareness of challenges of the exercise of the rights of older persons.
 
Action on Resolution on the Role of Prevention in the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.12) on the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council recognizes that States have the primary responsibility for the promotion and protection of all human rights, including the prevention of human rights violations; continues to invite national human rights institutions to consider addressing the issue of the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights in the framework of relevant international and regional forums; and requests the Office of the High Commissioner to organize, prior to the thirty-seventh session of the Human Rights Council, an expert workshop to discuss the role and contribution of civil society organizations, academia, national human rights institutions and other relevant stakeholders in the prevention of human rights abuses, drawing on the conclusions and recommendations of the above-mentioned study, and to prepare and submit a summary report on the above-mentioned workshop to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-ninth session.
 
Ukraine, introducing draft resolution L.12 on behalf of the Core Group, explained that there was a need for further evidence-based research to advance the understanding and effective implementation of measures that could prevent human rights violations.  The draft resolution asked for the organization, prior to its thirty-seventh session, of an expert workshop to discuss the role and contribution of civil society, academia, national human rights institutions and other relevant stakeholders in the prevention of human rights abuses, and for the preparation of a relevant summary report to be submitted at the Council’s thirty-ninth session.  It was expected that the results of the workshop could contribute to further preparation of a practical toolkit to support States and other stakeholders in the practical application of prevention.
 
Action on Resolution on Unaccompanied Migrant Children and Adolescents and Human Rights
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.13) on unaccompanied migrant children and adolescents and human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council calls upon countries of origin, transit and destination to facilitate family reunification, as appropriate, as an important objective that promotes the welfare and the best interests of unaccompanied migrant children and adolescents; also calls upon all States to ensure that their immigration policies are consistent with their obligations under international law, and to promote and protect the human rights of all migrants without discrimination; decides to convene at its thirty-fifth session a panel discussion on the theme “Unaccompanied migrant children and adolescents and human rights”; and  requests the Advisory Committee to submit a final report on the global issue of unaccompanied migrant children and adolescents and human rights to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-sixth session.
 
El Salvador, introducing draft resolution L.13, said that El Salvador had tried to include observations submitted to it, noting that a high number of countries from different regions supported the draft.  The Council was the United Nations body responsible for consolidating the protection of human rights around the world.  States were urged to take the principle of best interest into consideration as the prime principle.  Children were vulnerable, and when they were unaccompanied, that exposed them to dangers on their journeys.  Wherever migrant children were, they would be grateful for this gesture of hope.
 
Slovenia, speaking in a general comment on behalf of the European Union, said the European Union shared the concern about this tragic issue.  European Union Member States were committed to paying specific attention to the protection of vulnerable migrants.  They received targeted support.  The European Union would continue to rescue lives at sea, including those of migrant children.  Initiatives merited support from all stakeholders, such as the New York Declaration which expressed the will of world leaders, and other traditional initiatives on migrant rights.  The European Union could in that context join consensus on the draft resolution.
 
Mexico, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, reaffirmed its commitment to the promotion and protection of the rights of all migrants, and had sought the highest standards of protection for them.  The most recent resolution at the thirty-second session of the Council sought a holistic and balanced approach to the human rights of migrants, including in mass movements, and called for a broad dialogue on that issue.  Mexico was concerned that the proposed draft resolution focused on a specific group of migrants and thus risked establishing different standards for different groups of migrants.  Not only could standards be lowered, but there were too many initiatives on that subject.  There was also a risk of adding more workload to the already overwhelmed Council.
 
Action on Resolution on Local Government and Human Rights
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.14/Rev.1) on local government and human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to convene on the same day as the organizational meeting for its thirty-sixth session a panel discussion on the role of local government in the promotion and protection of human rights, the objective of which will be to identify ways in which local government can promote, protect and fulfil human rights effectively, particularly in the context of implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, in close cooperation with the national governments; and requests the High Commissioner to prepare a report on the panel discussion in the format of a summary, and to submit the report to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-eighth session.
 
Republic of Korea, introducing draft resolution L.14/Rev.1, said that the initiative was based on the idea that local government could have a direct impact on human rights, given its proximity to people.  The resolution had been drafted to explore the role of local government as an implementer of human rights as well as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
 
Action on Resolution on the Right of Everyone to the Enjoyment of the Highest Attainable Standard of Physical and Mental Health
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.15) on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health for a further period of three years; and requests the Special Rapporteur to submit an annual report to the Human Rights Council and to the General Assembly covering all activities relating to the mandate, with a view to maximizing the benefits of the reporting process.
 
Brazil, introducing the draft resolution, explained that the resolution proposed the extension of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standards of physical and mental health for a further three years.  For millions of people throughout the world the full enjoyment of that right still remained an elusive goal.  Health was a fundamental right, indispensable to the enjoyment of other human rights and necessary for living a life in dignity.  The draft resolution recognized the need of States, in cooperation with international organizations and civil society, to create favourable conditions at the national regional and international levels to ensure the full and effective enjoyment of the right to health.  It also requested Governments to fully cooperate with the Special Rapporteur, the Secretary-General, and the High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide all necessary resources for the fulfilment of the mandate.
 
Action on Resolution on the Human Rights to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.19) on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, adopted by a vote of 42 in favour, one against and four abstentions, the Council decides to extend the mandate of the current mandate holder as Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation for a period of three years.  The Council also calls upon States to identify, with a view to repealing and reforming them, all laws that have both direct and indirect discriminatory consequences with regard to the equal enjoyment of the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, as well as with regard to gender-based violence; to take action to tackle systemic inequalities and to meet their obligations to effectively achieve substantive gender equality in the enjoyment of the rights to safe drinking water and sanitation; and to prevent and combat root causes of gender inequalities, including the impact of social norms, stereotypes, roles and taboos with regard to both women and men, through public campaigns, education and the media, among other measures.
 
The result of the vote was as follows:
 
In favour (42): Albania, Algeria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bolivia, Botswana, Burundi, China, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, Ethiopia, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Latvia, Maldives, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Namibia, Netherlands, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia, Slovenia, South Africa, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Venezuela, and Viet Nam.
 
Against (1): Kyrgyzstan.
 
Abstentions (4): El Salvador, Kenya, Nigeria, and Russian Federation.
 
Before it took action on the resolution, the Council rejected an oral amendment to draft resolution L.19 by a vote of seven in favour, 25 against and 15 abstentions.
 
Germany, introducing draft resolution L.19, said that the resolution would allow the Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation to continue his work.  Equal access to safe drinking water and to sanitary facilities was crucial for the fulfilment of those human rights.
 
Kyrgyzstan introduced oral amendments to the text.
 
Germany expressed disappointment that oral amendments had been proposed at the last minute, noting that the resolution enjoyed the support of more than 60 countries which had co-sponsored it.  The amendments proposed could not be supported both due to substance and procedure, and Germany called for a vote on the amendments.
 
Paraguay, speaking in a general comment, said it shared Germany’s view.  The text in the draft resolution used agreed language.  Paraguay rejected the proposed amendment.
 
China, in a general comment, asked the Council Secretariat when the oral amendment had been submitted.
 
Namibia, in a general comment, urged Members of the Council to take into account the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development under which the international community promised to leave no one behind in access to basic services, including water and sanitation.  Water scarcity was a specific and common predicament in the developing world and thus the adoption of the draft resolution by consensus was crucial.  International cooperation and technical assistance was fundamental for States to realize the right of everyone to access basic services.  Namibia urged Member States to support the resolution as tabled.
 
China, in a general comment, clarified that the oral amendment had been submitted on the Council’s extranet at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, 28 September, and it asked that 24 hours be allowed to delegations for the consideration of the oral amendment.
 
Kyrgyzstan, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, requested a vote on draft resolution L.19.
 
Action on Resolution on Preventable Mortality and Morbidity of Children under 5 Years of Age as a Human Rights Concern
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.20) on preventable mortality and morbidity of children under 5 years of age as a human rights concern, adopted without a vote, the Council calls upon States to adopt a human rights-based approach to reduce and eliminate preventable mortality and morbidity of children under 5 years of age; also calls upon States and other relevant stakeholders to continue to take and intensify action at all levels to address the interlinked root causes of preventable mortality and morbidity of children under 5 years of age, such as poverty, malnutrition, harmful practices, violence, stigma and discrimination; and requests the High Commissioner to organize, prior to the thirty-ninth session of the Human Rights Council, in close collaboration with the World Health Organization, an expert workshop to discuss experiences in preventing mortality and morbidity of children under 5 years of age, with a particular focus on the implementation of the technical guidance.
 
Ireland, introducing draft resolution L.20 on behalf of a cross-regional core group, explained that the draft resolution was a follow-up to Human Rights Council resolutions 24/11 and 27/14 which had been adopted by consensus in 2013 and 2014.  While there had been some progress in reducing child mortality since 2013, it continued to be the case that more than 5.9 million children died every year before their fifth birthday.  Most of those deaths were preventable.  Variations in child mortality rates showed that stark inequalities between and within countries persisted.  That inequality was driven not only by poverty, but by social exclusion, discrimination, gender norms and the neglect for basic human rights.  That was why the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was asked to convene, in collaboration with the World Health Organization, an expert workshop to discuss challenges, best practices and lessons learned.
 
Action on Resolution on the Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.23) on human rights and indigenous peoples: mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples for a period of three years to, inter alia, examine ways and means of overcoming existing obstacles to the full and effective protection of the rights of indigenous peoples, in conformity with the mandate, and to identify, exchange and promote best practices; and to pay special attention to the human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous children and women.  The Council requests all Governments to cooperate fully with the Special Rapporteur in the performance of the tasks and duties mandated, to furnish all available information requested in his or her communications, and to react promptly to his or her urgent appeals.
 
Mexico, introducing draft resolution L.23, said that the draft resolution renewed the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, for a period of three years.  The Council was invited to renew the mandate by consensus and to continue cooperating with the mandate.
 
Action on Resolution on Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.24) on human rights and indigenous peoples, adopted without a vote, the Council requests the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to prepare a study, to be finalized by its tenth session, on good practices and challenges, including discrimination, in business and in access to financial services by indigenous peoples, in particular indigenous women and indigenous persons with disabilities, and to present it to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-sixth session; decides to hold, at its thirty-sixth session, its half-day panel discussion on the commemoration of the tenth anniversary of the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, with a special focus on challenges and good practices in achieving the ends of the Declaration; and calls upon States that that have not yet ratified or acceded to the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169) of the International Labour Organization to consider doing so.
 
Mexico, introducing draft resolution L.24 on behalf of Guatemala and Mexico, said that the draft resolution welcomed the work done by the Expert Mechanism and its report.  It called on the Expert Mechanism to conduct a study on good practices and challenges, as well as on discrimination against indigenous peoples in business and access to financial services, in particular by indigenous women and persons with disabilities.  The study would be presented to the Council at its thirty-sixth session.  The draft resolution also called for the holding of a half-day panel on the challenges and good practices in the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
 
France, in an explanation of the vote before the vote on behalf of France and the United Kingdom, stated their full commitment to the promotion and the defence of the rights of all individuals.  Persons belonging to indigenous communities should be able to enjoy the same rights and freedoms as any other individual, in full respect of the principles of equality and universality of human rights.
 
Action on Resolution on the Right to Development
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.29) on the right to development, adopted by a vote of 34 in favour, two against and 11 abstentions as orally revised, the Council decides to appoint, for a period of three years, a Special Rapporteur on the right to development, whose mandate will, inter alia, include: to contribute to the work of the Working Group on the Right to Development, with a view to supporting the accomplishment of its overall mandate; to contribute to the promotion, protection and fulfilment of the right to development in the context of the coherent and integrated implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; to engage and support efforts to mainstream the right to development among various United Nations bodies, development agencies, international development, financial and trade institutions; and to submit an annual report to the Human Rights Council and to the General Assembly covering all activities relating to the mandate, with a view to maximizing the benefits of the reporting process.  The Council requests the Office of the High Commissioner, in the implementation of the Declaration on the Right to Development, to take sufficient measures to ensure the balanced and visible allocation of resources and due attention to ensure the visibility of the right to development.
 
The result of the vote was as follows:
 
In favour (34): Algeria, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Burundi, China, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Maldives, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Namibia, Nigeria, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Togo, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, and Viet Nam.
 
Against (2): France, and United Kingdom.
 
Abstentions (11): Albania, Belgium, Georgia, Germany, Latvia, Netherlands, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, Switzerland, and The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
 
Venezuela, introducing draft resolution L.29 on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said that there had been small editorial changes to the draft resolution on the right to development.  The aim was to make small adjustments to the mandate.  The Non-Aligned Movement countries were committed to making justice and mother earth priorities.  Thus the aim of collective happiness could be achieved.  The Non-Aligned Movement proposed the creation of a mandate for a Special Rapporteur on the right to development, and the mandate was defined in operative paragraph 14 of the draft.  It would be complementary and not overlapping with the Working Group.
 
India, speaking in a general comment, said that the draft resolution was a clear expression of Member States’ strong commitment to advance discussions on the right to development.  That right remained a distant reality and there was need to infuse new energy into the Working Group so that it could fulfil its mandate.  The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was universal and the right to development could provide an enabling framework.
 
Kyrgyzstan, speaking in a general comment, supported the adoption of the resolution.  All nations should define their need for development themselves.  Small States should manage their own resources, but not all States had their equal right to development.  Small island developing States and landlocked countries were among those.  To ensure large States and transnational corporations did not provide hindrances, it was important to ensure the right to development.
 
Cuba, speaking in a general comment, supported the creation of the mandate of a Special Rapporteur on the right to development and underlined that all the necessary resources should be provided to that mandate.  It should be a new hope for millions of people worldwide and help provide an enabling environment for development in which countries could find their own models of development.  Tactics could not be used to hinder the adoption of the resolution on the right to development.
 
South Africa, speaking in a general comment on behalf of the African Group, underscored that 2016 was a crucial year for the start of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.  The African Group welcomed the important work undertaken by the Working Group, and underscored the need for a strong commitment by all Members States and all relevant funds and agencies to the right to development.  It also underlined the need to mainstream the right to development in the work of the United Nations.
 
Slovenia, speaking on behalf of the European Union in an explanation of the vote before the vote, reiterated the European Union’s support for the right to development.  It required a mix of policies creating an enabling environment.  States had the primary responsibility to ensure that the right to development was realized.  The European Union was not in favour of an international legal standard of a binding nature since that was not a proper instrument.  Diverging views remained and a common position had not been reached so far.  The European Union did not believe in the creation of another mechanism that would duplicate efforts.  The European Union would therefore not support the resolution.
 
United Kingdom, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that the primary responsibility for ensuring that the right to development was realized was owed to citizens by States.  The United Kingdom was not in favour of an international legal standard of a binding nature.  The Human Rights Council agenda was already overloaded and the appointment of a Special Rapporteur detracted from more pressing items.  The United Kingdom would call for a vote on the text and would vote no, despite its support for the right to development.
 
Mexico, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that development was a priority for Mexico’s national agenda.  But, it would have preferred if the text had not drawn up any binding international instrument on the right to development.  Efforts should have focused on development standards without prejudging their nature.  Mexico supported the strengthening of the human rights system and procedures.  There was a need for further streamlining in order to avoid overlapping of the different mechanisms.  Mexico believed that the new Special Procedure would provide an added value to the work of the Working Group.  The best way to work was to foster a process of open dialogue and cooperation in order to conclude the ongoing work.
 
Switzerland, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, welcomed the effort of the entire international community to implement the right to development.  That remained a topical subject and Switzerland thanked Venezuela for having presented the draft resolution.  The establishment of a human rights expert on the right to development did not emerge from the work of the Working Group so it would present duplication of the Council’s work.  Switzerland was thus of the view that the establishment of a Special Rapporteur did not constitute a solution to current challenges with respect to the right to development and would abstain.
 
Action on Resolution under the Agenda Item on Follow-up to and the Implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action
 
Action on Resolution on National Human Rights Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.17/Rev.1) on national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council encourages Member States to establish effective, independent and pluralistic national human rights institutions or, where they already exist, to strengthen them to enable the effective fulfilment of their mandate to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms for all; calls upon States to promptly and thoroughly investigate any cases of alleged reprisal or intimidation against members or staff of national human rights institutions or against individuals who cooperate, seek to cooperate or have cooperated with them, and to bring the perpetrators to justice; and encourages national human rights institutions to continue to participate in and contribute to the work of the Human Rights Council, including the universal periodic review.
 
Australia, introducing draft resolution L.17/Rev.1, said that the resolution on national institutions for the protection and promotion of human rights built on the momentum created by United Nations General Assembly resolution which had recognized the importance of national human rights institutions’ participation in United Nations mechanisms.  The resolution would invite the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the United Nations Permanent Forum to enhance the participation of national human rights institutions in their work.
 
United Kingdom, speaking in a general comment, welcomed the resolution and supported its objective and focus.  All three United Kingdom national human rights institutions provided crucial assistance, including support towards Universal Periodic Reviews.  The United Kingdom looked forward to the adoption of the resolution.
 
India, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that India supported the strengthening of national human rights institutions.  Consistent with the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, each State could choose its most suitable framework.  Some provisions were overly prescriptive.  The role and nature of national human rights institutions were defined in national legislation establishing them.  The main sponsors were urged to remain attentive to those dimensions as regards national human rights institutions.
 
Action on Resolutions under the Agenda Item on Technical Assistance and Capacity Building
 
Action on Resolution on Technical Assistance and Capacity Building for Yemen in the Field of Human Rights
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.5) on technical assistance and capacity-building for Yemen in the field of human rights, adopted without a vote as orally revised, the Council calls upon all parties in Yemen to respect their obligations under international human rights law and international humanitarian law, to stop immediately attacks on civilians and to ensure humanitarian access to the affected population nationwide; requests the High Commissioner to provide substantive technical assistance and advice, including in the areas of accountability and legal support to enable the National Commission to complete its investigatory work concerning allegations of violations and abuses committed by all relevant parties in Yemen to fulfil its mandate in line with international standards and finalize its comprehensive report on all alleged human rights violations and abuses before the thirty-sixth Human Rights Council; requests the High Commissioner to allocate additional international human rights experts to the Yemen Office to complement the investigatory work of the National Commission, while collecting and preserving information to establish the facts and circumstances of alleged violations and abuses; and requests the High Commissioner to present to the Human Rights Council, at its thirty-fourth session, an oral update on the situation of human rights in Yemen, and a written report on violations and abuses since September 2014 at its thirty-sixth session.
 
Sudan, introducing draft resolution L.5, noted that Yemen was going through a very vulnerable situation and that it needed all possible support to investigate the committed human rights violations.  The draft resolution aimed to strengthen cooperation with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Human Rights Council to improve the human rights situation in Yemen.  Sudan expressed hope that the draft resolution would be supported by all Member States.
 
Yemen, speaking as the concerned country, expressed appreciation to the Arab Group and all countries that had prepared the draft resolution.  The very complicated situation in Yemen made the country very vulnerable and it needed urgent support of the international community to fulfil its human rights obligations.  Yemen was interested in conducting investigations into all human rights violations.  It welcomed the draft resolution and its aims to provide further technical assistance and capacity building.
 
Slovenia, speaking in a general comment on behalf of the European Union, expressed deep concern about the situation of human rights in Yemen.  The situation had deteriorated further and there were devastating effects for the population.  All parties were urged to recall their obligations under international humanitarian law.  The draft resolution was a good and reasonable compromise text and the European Union could support the resolution.  The Council was taking a united approach to tackling abuses in Yemen.  The European Union welcomed that the final text allowed the High Commissioner to deploy additional resources to his office in Yemen.  It was important for the Council to receive an update at its thirty-fourth session.  The Human Rights Council needed to follow the situation in Yemen closely.
 
Mexico, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, expressed deep concern about the situation in Yemen.  Efforts to render people accountable were supported.  Mexico welcomed the fact that a solution had been found which united the Council on how to best support Yemen in fulfilling its obligations.  Mexico appealed to the sponsors of the resolution to work with other Human Rights Council members so consensus work could be continued.  Mexico would have preferred an international monitoring mechanism.
 
Action on Resolution on Assistance to Somalia in the Field of Human Rights
 
In a resolution (A/HRC/33/L.11/Rev.1) on assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to renew the mandate of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Somalia, under agenda item 10, for a period of one year, and also requests the Independent Expert to report to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-sixth session.  The Council further calls upon the Federal Government of Somalia, with the support of the international community, to prepare for and hold a credible, transparent and inclusive election process in 2016 leading to the establishment of the Upper House, the election of members of the House of the People, and the subsequent election of a President and a Government in accordance with the agreed framework and electoral model, and to continue work to establish independent, accountable and efficient judicial institutions.
 
United Kingdom, introducing the draft resolution L.11/Rev.1, stated that decades of conflict had created real challenges to the full promotion and protection of human rights in Somalia.  The United Kingdom commended the Somali Government’s open approach to its human rights challenges and cooperation with the Human Rights Council.  The draft resolution provided an honest and credible analysis of what those challenges were and critically set out concrete actions to which the Government of Somalia was committed to.  It called for the support of the international community and for the extension of the mandate of the Independent Expert for a further year.  It was critical for the international community to respond to the resolution and to provide Somalia with technical assistance and capacity building.
 
Somalia, speaking as the concerned country, noted that the draft resolution recognized the importance of technical assistance to Somalia and that the primary responsibility rested with the Government.  It also condemned the attacks perpetrated by Al-Shabaab.  It recognized the positive role that Somali women had played in peace building and noted the acceptance of the Somali Government of the recommendations of the Universal Periodic Review.  The draft called on the Federal Government to hold transparent, free and fair elections, to promote reconciliation, to ensure the participation of women and minorities in political life, and to publish a plan on the implementation of the Media Law.

__________________

For use of the information media; not an official record