COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ADOPTS RESOLUTIONS ON HUMAN RIGHTS IN IRAN, SUDAN AND DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO

Commission on Human Rights
57th session
20 April 2001
Morning





Approves Chairman’s Statement on Situation in East Timor


The Commission on Human Rights this morning adopted resolutions on the situation of human rights in Iran, Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo as well as a Chairman’s statement on East Timor.

Concerning the situation in Iran, the Commission adopted a resolution by a roll-call vote of 21 in favour to 17 against with 15 abstentions in which it noted with interest the assessment of the Special Representative on the situation in Iran that certain foundational improvements had taken place in areas such as women's education, democracy, and health, and that the trend was now irreversible. The Commission recognized the efforts made by the Government of Iran to strengthen respect for human rights in the country, but expressed its continuing concern at violations of human rights in the country, in particular the recent deterioration of the situation with regard to freedom of opinion and expression, especially attacks against the freedom of the press.

The Commission decided to extend the mandate of the Special Representative on Iran for a further year.

With regards to the situation in Sudan, the Commission approved a resolution by a roll-call vote of 28 in favour against none and with 25 abstentions in which it welcomed the expressed commitment of the Government to respect and promote human rights and the rule of law. It also expressed its deep concern at the impact of the ongoing armed conflict on the situation of human rights and its adverse effects on the civilian population, in particular women and children, and at continuing serious violations of human rights, including summary or arbitrary executions. It called on the Government to ensure full respect for freedom of religion, to end all acts of torture, and to ensure freedom of expression, opinion, thought, and conscience.

The Commission decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Sudan for a further year.

On the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Commission adopted without a vote a resolution in which it welcomed the commitments made by the parties in Lusaka on 15 February 2001 and recent progress made in achieving respect for the cease-fire called for. It also welcomed the cooperation shown by the Government to the Special Rapporteur. The Commission expressed its concern at the adverse impact of the conflict on the situation of human rights and its severe consequences for the security and well-being of the civilian population, and at continued perpetration of massacres and atrocities, summary and arbitrary executions, disappearances, torture, beating, harassment, arbitrary arrest and detention without trial, including of journalists and opposition politicians; and at widespread use of sexual violence against women and children.

The Commission decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur for a further year; and decided to request the Special Rapporteur on the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, along with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions and a member of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances to carry out in cooperation with the National Commission of Inquiry, a joint mission to investigate all massacres carried out on the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo with a view to bringing to justice those responsible.

And in a Chairman's statement, the Commission welcomed the encouraging improvements in the judicial system in East Timor and the first measures that had been taken against suspects accused of crimes against humanity and other serious crimes committed during the violence of 1999. The Commission also welcomed concrete steps taken by the Government of Indonesia to investigate fully the violations of human rights perpetrated in East Timor in the period leading up to and immediately following the popular consultation of August 1999 and urged the Government of Indonesia to establish the proposed ad hoc human rights court to bring to justice the suspects of such violations.

The Commission will meet at 3 p.m. to continue to take action on draft resolutions.


Action on resolutions under the question of the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in any part of the world

In a resolution on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran (E/CN.4/2001/L.22), adopted by a roll-call vote of 21 in favour to 17 against with 15 abstentions, the Commission noted with interest the assessment of the Special Representative on the situation in Iran that certain foundational improvements had taken place in areas such as women's education, democracy, and health, and that the trend was now irreversible and hoped that this trend would be further consolidated and also include other areas during the coming year; deeply regretted that, since 1996, no invitation had been extended by the Government of Iran to the Special Representative of visit the country and strongly urged the Government to invite the Special Representative; welcomed improvements in the field of women's education, health and democratic participation but was deeply concerned that many of those efforts had not yet been promulgated as law; welcomed the reports that religion would no longer be requested in the registration of births, marriages, divorces or deaths; noted with interest the announcement that the Office of the Public Prosecutor would be re-established; noted that Government agents accused of involvement in the suspicious deaths and killings of intellectuals and political activists had been convicted, while regretting that all the circumstances surrounding the killings had still not been fully clarified, and urged the Government of Iran to continue its investigations and to bring alleged perpetrators to justice; and noted recent positive steps regarding the situation of the Baha'is, but expressed concern at the still-existing discrimination against persons belonging to minorities, in particular against Baha'is.

The Commission recognized the efforts made by the Government of Iran to strengthen respect for human rights in the country, but expressed its continuing concern at violations of human rights in the country, in particular the recent deterioration of the situation with regard to freedom of opinion and expression, especially attacks against the freedom of the press, the harsh sentences imposed on those who participated in the Berlin Conference, the imprisonment of journalists and the harsh reactions to student demonstrations, and urged all Iranian authorities to ensure full respect for freedom of expression; deplored the continued executions in the apparent absence of respect for internationally recognized safeguards, in particular public and especially cruel executions; called upon the Government to take all necessary steps to end the use of torture and other cruel punishments, in particular the practice of amputation, and to carry out penitentiary reform; expressed concern over the still unsatisfactory compliance with international standards in the administration of justice and the absence of due process of law and the use of national security laws to deny the rights of the individual; encouraged the Islamic Human Rights Commission to continue and increase its essential work; called upon the Government of Iran to give effect, in the near future, to its invitation to the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances to visit the country, as well as to consider extending invitations to other relevant thematic mechanisms to visit the country; and decided to extend the mandate of the Special Representative for a further year.

The result of the roll-call vote was as follow:

In favour (21):- Belgium, Canada, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Ecuador, France, Germany, Guatemala, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Mauritius, Mexico, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Against (17):- Algeria, China, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Syrian Arab Republic, Venezuela and Viet Nam.

Abstentions (15):- Argentina, Brazil, Burundi, Cameroon, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, Madagascar, Niger, Republic of Korea, South Africa, Swaziland, Thailand, Uruguay and Zambia.

A Representative of Iran said that the practice of tabling unwarranted draft resolutions against several developing countries in the Commission had intensified and had given rise to speculation that the real aim of the sponsors in tabling such draft resolutions was not the promotion of human rights, but rather the utilization of yet another means of domination over developing countries. Politicization of human rights by imposing certain political and cultural schools of thought did not contribute to the realization of the human rights causes and the betterment of humanity. An ample example of double standards and politicization of human rights by the western countries was that while sponsors were charging that some countries were violating human rights, they found themselves unable to acknowledge the gross and systematic violations of human rights in the occupied Arab territories during the fifth Special Session of the Commission.


The draft resolution before the Commission acknowledged many positive political and social trends and developments in Iran. If the draft resolution was supposed to be a basis of judgment, its contents showed very clearly that Iran did not deserve to be the target of such resolution. The protection and promotion of human rights, as well as alleviation of all cases of violations of human rights, were fundamental principles to which the Government of Iran was fully committed. The sponsors ignored the fact that the monitoring machinery of the Commission was only applied to cases of gross and systematic violations of human rights. If isolated instances justified tabling resolutions, many countries including the European Union Member States would be subject to close scrutiny.

A Representative of Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Conference, said the OIC had consistently opposed the practice of some countries and groups of submitting resolutions in the Commission which were selectively critical of some developing and Islamic countries. For the last 17 years, a group of countries had initiated the resolution regarding the situation of human rights in Iran, in total disregard to the progress achieved by Iran towards promoting human rights. The OIC urged all members of the Commission to oppose this draft resolution which was incoherent. The positive efforts that the Government was undertaking deserved the support and appreciation of the international community, and this draft resolution contravened constructive engagement. It was tantamount to an annual verdict aimed to castigate and blemish a country which had demonstrated willingness to adopt every possible measure to improve the human rights situation. The OIC called for a roll-call vote.

A Representative of Indonesia said that considering the efforts made by Iran to improve the human rights situation in the country, the draft resolution seemed unbalanced and caused feelings of antagonism which were hardly conducive to building a climate of trust. Indonesia believed that the positive human rights development that had taken place in Iran over the past 4 years should be encouraged. This included the restructuring of the judicial system and improvements in the situation of women. Furthermore, Iran was actively cooperating with UN agencies which represented a step in the right direction. Consequently, Indonesia urged the Commission to oppose the draft resolution; Indonesia would vote against it.

A Representative of Algeria said his delegation shared the opinions expressed by preceding speakers from Pakistan and Indonesia. The draft resolution L.22 made no sense. No one could judge a country like Iran which had made tremendous achievements during the last 20 years. The democratic situation had also been evolving after the theocratic regime of the past. Dialogue had to be encouraged at all levels. The draft resolution should be abandoned and a consensus declaration should be made taking into account the progress made by Iran in past years.

A Representative of China said that his country had carefully studied draft resolution L.22 and believed that the allegations contained therein were not in line with facts. The Government of Iran had committed itself to a process of democratization and the Iranian people increasingly enjoyed social, economic and cultural rights as well as civil and political rights. The Government of Iran had established international cooperation in the human rights field and encouraged a dialogue among civilizations. Exerting pressure on Iran through country specific resolutions was not conducive to the promotion of human rights but amounted to their politicization. In view of the above, the Chinese delegation would vote against L.22.

A Representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya said that once again, here was a draft resolution targeting a developing country. This pattern raised questions on whether the system practised by the Commission was fair. It appeared that the Commission was only concerned with the situation in certain countries. One saw no drafts on situations of racism or xenophobia or abuses of migrant workers or refugees or prisoners or detainees or trafficking in women and children or the prostitution of children in developed countries. Where had the Commission been when Iran was under the Shah, and there was torture and other widespread violations of the rights of Iranians? Why did the Commission only react after the Iranian Muslim revolution? Libya would vote against the draft resolution on Iran, as the motive behind the measure had no relation to the promotion of human rights in Iran, and because the measure was not balanced, contained many misleading statements and did not represent the true situation in the country.

A Representative of Cuba said Iran was striving to create conditions conducive to the promotion and protection of human rights. The powers that were introducing this draft resolution today had closed their eyes to the atrocities committed during the reign of the Shah. This was another example of how the Commission was being used. Rather than a resolution of condemnation, Iran deserved a resolution encouraging it in the work that it was doing to promote the rights of the Iranian people. This draft resolution was selective, unjust, followed the interests of some countries and did not mirror the progress achieved in the field of human rights in Iran. For these reasons Cuba would vote against the draft resolution.

A Representative of Thailand said that only dialogue and patience should prevail in any international cooperation. This draft resolution was not meant to promote a dialogue. It did not intend to encourage the Iranian Government to continue with its achievements nor did it appreciate the efforts of the Government, which in the view of Thailand were encouraging.

A Representative of Venezuela said his country supported the Commission's activities, but that its activities should be based on cooperation rather than confrontation. The Iranian Government had made important efforts to improve its human rights performance; further progress could only be made on the basis of dialogue and cooperation. The draft resolution would not lead to that. A consensus statement would have been better.

A Representative of Brazil said that her delegation’s abstention on resolution L.22 was based on positive developments in Iran. In his report, the Special Representative on Iran had recognized the positive developments in the country but he also pointed that there were several aspects that needed to be improved on, including the rights of minorities. The Brazilian abstention should not be construed as an endorsement of the current situation, including the recent detention of several journalists, but as an acknowledgement of the positive developments achieved.

A Representative of Mexico said Iran had made important advances in respect of human rights; a deep change was under way. The President had shown commitment to improving human rights, and the Iranian community had shown much will; but the Commission and the international community also had done much to advance human rights in that country. Mexico regretted that the Special Representative had not been allowed to visit the country, as that would have allowed an impartial investigation of the situation, especially as there were reports of continued serious violations there. Invitations also should be extended by Iran to other Commission mechanisms to visit the country.

A Representative of Japan said that the achievements made by Iran in recent years were known to the international community and the draft resolution was not meant to deny that situation.



In a resolution (E/CN.4/2001/L.25) on the situation of human rights in Sudan, approved by roll-call vote of 28 in favour against none and with 25 abstentions, the Commission welcomed, among other things, the full cooperation extended by the Government of Sudan to the former and new Special Rapporteurs during visits to the country, as well as cooperation extended to other United Nations mandate holders in the field of human rights; the technical cooperation agreement signed by the Government of Sudan; the expressed commitment of the Government to respect and promote human rights and the rule of law; the stipulation of basic rights and freedoms in the Constitution of the Sudan; the activities of the Committee for the Eradication of Abduction of Women and Children; expressed its deep concern at the impact of the ongoing armed conflict on the situation of human rights and its adverse effects on the civilian population, in particular women and children, and at continuing serious violations of human rights, including summary or arbitrary executions; the use of child soldiers and combatants, forced conscription by the Sudanese People's Liberation Army, forced displacement, arbitrary detention, torture, and of still-unresolved cases of enforced or involuntary disappearances; the abduction of women and children for purposes of forced labour; and expressed its deep concern at the forced displacements of populations, in particular in areas surrounding oilfields.

The Commission expressed concern at violations in areas under control of the Government, including restrictions on freedom of religion, expression, association and peaceful assembly, arbitrary arrest and detention without trial, and cases of torture; urged all parties to the conflict to respect and protect human rights; to put in place an effective and monitored cease-fire; to stop the use of weapons against the civilian population; for the Government to cease immediately all indiscriminate aerial bombardments of the civilian population; for the SPLA to abstain from using civilian premises for military purposes; called on all parties to resume peace talks immediately; called upon the Government to comply fully with its obligations under international human rights instruments; to strengthen the rule of law; to liberalize legal provisions on public order; to ensure full respect for freedom of religion; to raise the age of criminal responsibility; to end all acts of torture; and to ensure freedom of expression, opinion, thought, and conscience; and decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur for a further year.

The result of the roll-call vote was as follows:

In favour (28):- Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Ecuador, France, Germany, Guatemala, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Mauritius, Mexico, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, South Africa, Spain,
the United Kingdom, Uruguay and Venezuela.

Against (0):- None

Abstentions (25):- Algeria, Burundi, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand,
the United States, Viet Nam, and Zambia.

A Representative of Sudan said his Government was ready to continue cooperation with the United Nations and the Special Rapporteur. Sudan was undergoing a period of transition in terms of economic, social and political life. The war was to blamed for whatever shortcomings in the area of human rights. However, the Government would leave no stone unturned in the quest for a peaceful political solution and it welcomed international cooperation in that field. Sudan was pleased to note that the draft resolution referred positively to the Sudanese Government 27 times for recent constructive developments in the field of human rights and referred negatively 15 times to the so-called SPLA. Sudan reiterated the call of the Sweden delegation not to call for a vote on this draft resolution. If a roll-call vote was asked however, Sudan urged Member States to abstain.

A Representative of Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, said negotiations on the draft resolution on Sudan were open and fair and had resulted in an acceptable text. The draft recognized several constructive developments that had recently taken place. It was regrettable that one delegation had called for a vote on the measure; this was clear politicization and had nothing to do with true human rights concerns. It called the credibility of the Commission into question. Because of this call for a vote, Member States of the Organization of the Islamic Conference who were members of the Commission had decided to abstain.

A Representative of the United States said his country was obligated to register its disappointment with the draft resolution that had been put forward on the human rights situation in Sudan. The resolution on Sudan failed to condemn the continued practice of slavery in the country. Slavery occurred in areas under Government control and was practised by militias allied to the Government. The Government did not acknowledged the problem of slavery and had not acted aggressively to bring that practice to a halt. The draft resolution should have stated those facts clearly. It detailed the senseless attacks against relief installations from the air and from the ground by both sides in the conflict, which had continued this past year. The tragic human rights situation in Sudan required action -- and the Government of Sudan was fully aware of the important steps it should take at this critical juncture.

A Representative of Norway said that it would vote in favour of L.25. Norway renewed its appeal for a comprehensive cease-fire to be overseen by monitors.

A Representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was satisfied that the Government of Sudan and other countries had reached a consensus text; but unfortunately a delegation had asked for a vote on the draft resolution, aborting all the efforts made by Sudan and other members of the Commission and conferring a political character on the matter. The Libyan delegation valued greatly the consultations that had been carried out, and the efforts and open and transparent dialogue that had led to the consensus text. It would have been better to encourage more cooperation, instead of pointing an accusing finger at Sudan. Libya would hence abstain in voting on the resolution.

A Representative of China said that the Government of Sudan was according great attention to protecting human rights. The Commission should therefore encourage and appreciate efforts made by Sudan in this regard. China regretted that a consensus could not be reached on L.25 and called for a roll-call vote; China would abstain on the resolution.


In a resolution (E/CN.4/2001/L.26) on the situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, adopted without a vote, the Commission welcomed, among other things, the commitments made by the parties in Lusaka on 15 February 2001 and recent progress made in achieving respect for the cease-fire called for, and urged all parties not to resume hostilities; the cooperation shown by the Government to the Special Rapporteur; the commitment by the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to cooperate with United Nations agencies and non-governmental organizations in ensuring the demobilization and reintegration of child soldiers; the announcement that the Military Court would no longer deal with civilian cases; expressed its concern at the adverse impact of the conflict on the situation of human rights and its severe consequences for the security and well-being of the civilian population; at continued perpetration of massacres and atrocities; at summary and arbitrary executions, disappearances, torture, beating, harassment, arbitrary arrest and detention without trial, including of journalists and opposition politicians; and expressed its concern at widespread use of sexual violence against women and children.

The Commission expressed concern at the excessive accumulation and spread of small arms and light weapons and trafficking of arms in the region; urged all parties to the conflict to facilitate the re-establishment, without delay, of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Democratic Republic of the Congo; to protect human rights and respect international humanitarian law; to ensure the safety and freedom of movement of United Nations and associated personnel; to cease all military activity; to put an immediate end to the recruitment and use of child soldiers; to take and implement conditions for the voluntary and safe return of all refugees and displaced persons; to cooperate fully with the National Commission of Inquiry on the alleged massacres of a large number of refugees and displaced persons; called upon the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to comply fully with its obligations under international humanitarian law; to reform and restore the judicial system; to put an end to impunity for human-rights violations; to create conditions to allow for democratization; to ensure respect for freedom of opinion, expression, and of the press; to cooperate fully with the International Tribunal for Rwanda in ensuring that all responsible for the genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the Geneva Conventions were brought to justice; decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur for a further year; and decided to request the Special Rapporteur on the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, along with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions and a member of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances to carry out in cooperation with the National Commission of Inquiry, a joint mission to investigate all massacres carried out on the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo with a view to bringing to justice those responsible.

A Representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo said that the draft resolution before the Commission was important for his delegation since it showed the progress achieved in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The draft resolution reminded all that efforts needed to be made to continue improving the situation. It also called on the warring parties to heed the appeals of the international community. The draft resolution was important since it was an encouragement by the international community for the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The Commission was called upon to approve the draft resolution.

A Representative of Kenya said the text of the draft resolution was balanced and her delegation would support it. A consensus adoption of the text would be preferable.


Chairman’s statement on East Timor

In a Chairman's statement, the Commission welcomed the encouraging improvements in the judicial system in East Timor and the first measures that had been taken against suspects accused of crimes against humanity and other serious crimes committed during the violence of 1999; emphasized the importance of continuing international assistance for the strengthening of the justice system in East Timor and the importance of the ongoing reconciliation process; welcomed the forthcoming establishment of a Truth, Reception and Reconciliation Commission; welcomed concrete steps taken by the Government of Indonesia to investigate fully the violations of human
rights perpetrated in East Timor in the period leading up to and immediately following the popular consultation of August 1999; urged the Government of Indonesia to establish the proposed ad hoc human rights court to bring to justice the suspects of such violations; welcomed the cooperation between the Government and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights with a view to enhancing the capacity of the judicial system and in particular the functioning of the ad hoc human rights court.

The Commission also reiterated the need for enhanced cooperation between UNTAET and the Government of Indonesia; condemned the brutal murders last September of three international staff members of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in West Timor as well as attacks on the United Nations presence in East Timor, and expected that the ongoing Indonesian trials of the suspects would be conducted in conformity with international standards; urged the Government of Indonesia to continue to disarm and disband the militia, to restore security in the refugee camps of West Timor and to take measures to ensure that refugees could make a free and informed choice whether to return to East Timor or resettle in Indonesia; encouraged it to strengthen its endeavours to resolve the problem of large numbers of refugees still in camps in West Timor; and said all efforts should be made to complete the refugee repatriation programme in accordance with international standards including the need for an impartial and transparent registration of refugees in order to enable them to register to vote in the East Timor general elections to be held on 30 August.




* *** *