COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ADOPTS RESOLUTIONS ON HUMAN RIGHTS IN SIERRA LEONE, BURUNDI, EQUATORIAL GUINEA AND RWANDA

Commission on Human Rights
57th session
20 April 2001
Afternoon






Extends Mandate for Special Rapporteur on Burundi,
Special Representative on Equatorial Guinea,
Ends Mandate of Special Representative on Rwanda



The Commission on Human Rights this afternoon adopted four resolutions on the situation of human rights in Sierra Leone, Burundi, Equatorial Guinea and Rwanda, as well as a decision on Cyprus.

Concerning the situation of human rights in Sierra Leone, the Commission adopted by consensus a resolution in which it welcomed the agreement signed on 10 November 2000 in Abuja between the Government and the Revolutionary United Front and steps taken to build a human rights infrastructure, including establishment of a National Human Rights Commission. The Commission expressed grave concern at abuses of human rights committed in Sierra Leone, generally with impunity, in particular atrocities against civilians perpetrated by the Revolutionary United Front and others, including executions, mutilations, abductions, arbitrary detention, hostage-taking, forced recruitment, forced labour, forced displacement, harassment, looting, attacks and killings of journalists, and continued detention of abductees. The Commission reiterated its call upon the Government to investigate reports of violations and abuses and to end impunity.

With regards to Burundi, the Commission adopted by consensus a resolution in which it supported the political compact between the Government of Burundi and the National Assembly, and the dialogue among Burundians taking place under the Arusha peace process and encouraged the Government to continue actions aimed at associating all sectors of Burundian society in the work of national reconciliation. The Commission remained concerned at ongoing violence and the security situation in parts of the country and condemned the intensifying violence, especially against civilians. It deplored the unacceptable living conditions in the displaced persons sites, and welcomed the dismantling of regroupment camps. The Commission decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation in Burundi for a further year.

The Commission adopted by consensus a resolution on the situation in Equatorial Guinea and assistance in the field of human rights, in which it encouraged the Government to guarantee full enjoyment of the freedoms of movement and association and to ensure further full enjoyment of the freedom of information, the freedom of opinion and expression and the right to a free press. The Commission noted with interest the continuing financial efforts and the political will of the Government in the establishment of the Centre for the Promotion of Human Rights and Democracy and called upon it to continue to ensure the independence and effectiveness of the National Commission on Human Rights. The Commission decided to renew for a further year the mandate of the Special Representative.

On the situation of human rights in Rwanda, the Commission adopted a resolution by a roll-call vote of 28 in favour to 16 against and with 9 abstentions, in which it recommended that the international community continue to provide assistance for the development of Rwanda to ensure, in the long term, its recovery and stability. The Commission decided to end the mandate of the Special Representative and decided to end its consideration of the situation of human rights in Rwanda.

And in a measure on the question of human rights in Cyprus, the Commission decided, without a vote, to retain on its agenda sub-item (a), entitled "Question of human rights in Cyprus", of the item entitled "Question of the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in any part of the world", and to give it due priority at its fifty-eighth session.

The Commission will resume its meeting from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. to continue to take action on draft releases.


Action on resolutions and decision

In a resolution (E/CN.4/2001/L.27) on the situation of human rights in Sierra Leone, adopted by consensus, the Commission welcomed, among other things, the agreement signed on 10 November 2000 in Abuja between the Government and the Revolutionary United Front; initiatives taken to prepare for early establishment of an effectively functioning Truth and Reconciliation Commission; steps taken to build a human rights infrastructure, including establishment of a National Human Rights Commission; the draft agreement for creation of an independent Special Court to bring to justice those bearing greatest responsibility for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and other serious violations of international humanitarian law; and work done by the National Commission on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration; expressed grave concern at abuses of human rights committed in Sierra Leone, generally with impunity, in particular atrocities against civilians perpetrated by the Revolutionary United Front and others, including executions, mutilations, abductions, arbitrary detention, hostage taking, forced recruitment, forced labour, forced displacement, harassment, looting, attacks and killings of journalists, and continued detention of abductees; at the targeting and abuse of women and girls committed by the Revolutionary United Front and others; at the slow pace of disarmament; at the dire humanitarian situation of the population; and deplored the ongoing atrocities committed by the rebels.

The Commission urged all parties to the conflict to respect human rights and international humanitarian law; to provide full and unconditional cooperation to the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone; to work to ensure full and early disarming of combatants; urged all parties to ensure the civilian character of camps for refugees and internally displaced persons; called upon the Government of Sierra Leone to continue to meet its international human rights obligations, among other things by giving priority attention to the special needs of all mutilated victims and of women and children in its care; reiterated its call upon the Government to investigate reports of violations and abuses and to end impunity; and decided to request the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the international community to assist Sierra Leone to establish and maintain an effectively functioning Truth and Reconciliation Commission, to strengthen the court and judicial systems, to provide funds, personnel, equipment and services for the Special Court, and to make technical assistance available to the Special Court.


In a resolution (E/CN.4/2001/L.28) on the situation of human rights in Burundi, adopted by consensus, the Commission supported the political compact between the Government of Burundi and the National Assembly, and the dialogue among Burundians taking place under the Arusha peace process; noted the continuing need to make the negotiation process more inclusive; encouraged the Government to continue actions aimed at associating all sectors of Burundian society in the work of national reconciliation; remained concerned at ongoing violence and the security situation in parts of the country; condemned the intensifying violence, especially against civilians; invited all signatories and international guarantors of the peace agreement to consider ways in which the armed groups could be induced to cease hostilities and join the peace process; deplored the unacceptable living conditions in the displaced persons sites; welcomed the dismantling of regroupment camps; requested the Government to take more measures to put an end to impunity; welcomed the entry into force of the new code of penal procedure; and welcomed continuing cooperation between the Government and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

The Commission noted the efforts in the struggle against impunity and for the promotion of human rights on the part of the Government; condemned all rebel attacks on humanitarian workers; condemned the illegal sale and distribution of weapons and related materials which disturbed peace and security in the region; requested States not to allow their territories to be used as bases for incursions or attacks against another State; exhorted States and relevant organizations to coordinate planning so as to promote sustainable development when the situation in Burundi permitted it; and decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation in Burundi for a further year.

A Representative of Burundi said the adoption of the draft resolution by consensus would be a recognition of the efforts made by Burundi in reconstructing peace in the country. Burundi was willing to implement the Arusha peace agreement and bring peace to the country.


In a resolution (E/CN.4/2001/L.29) on the situation in Equatorial Guinea and assistance in the field of human rights, adopted by consensus, the Commission encouraged the Government of Equatorial Guinea to adopt further quick and effective measures to comply with the recommendations made previously by the Commission and the Commission's Special Representative on the situation in Equatorial Guinea; to guarantee full enjoyment of the freedoms of movement and association; to continue its cooperation with the International Committee of the Red Cross; to ensure further full enjoyment of the freedom of information, the freedom of opinion and expression and the right to a free press; to adhere to the Convention against Torture and the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination and to submit reports to the Human Rights Committee and to the Committee on the Rights of the Child; to safeguard the right to justice, the independence of the judiciary with respect to the executive branch and the restriction of military jurisdiction; to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women; to make further efforts to broaden the dialogue with opposition parties; to guarantee economic, social and cultural rights, including those of children and especially those that affected the population living in poverty; and to promote and protect the rights of the child.

The Commission also welcomed the willingness of the Government Equatorial Guinea to implement a national human rights action plan; called upon the specialized bodies and agencies of the United Nations as well as donor countries and any other international institutions present in the country to assist the Government in strengthening national institutions on human rights; welcomed the recent invitations by the Government to the Special Representative and to the thematic rapporteurs of the Commission and looked forward to their early visits; noted with interest the continuing financial efforts and the political will of the Government in the establishment of the Centre for the Promotion of Human Rights and Democracy; called upon the Government to continue to ensure the independence and effectiveness of the National Commission on Human Rights; and decided to renew for a further year the mandate of the Special Representative.

A Representative of Equatorial Guinea said the Government decided a long time ago to partake in the work of the Commission in a spirit of cooperation and not confrontation. The head of the Government of Equatorial Guinea had explained to the Commission the positive steps taken concerning human rights in the last 20 years. There were no grave problems in Equatorial Guinea in the field of human rights. It was necessary to respect and safeguard dignity of the people of Equatorial Guinea, like all peoples. The country reminded the Commission that it had always accepted visits from Experts and Special Rapporteurs. One recent exception was because there was no clarity on the terms of the visit. These examples should cease in this Commission. How could a Special Representative go to Spain to report on Equatorial Guinea? This could be harmful to the mission of this Commission. Equatorial Guinea was reaffirming its openness, and invited all members to back a draft resolution sponsored by the country and the African Group.

A Representative of Mexico said that the draft resolution should be put in action without waiting for technical assistance. Equatorial Guinea had been receiving technical assistance for many years. There were deficiencies in respect for human rights in the country despite the assistance provided to the State. The draft resolution also did not ask the State to cooperate with the Commission. It should also be told to cooperate with other mechanisms.

A Representative of Algeria said the legal advisor within the UN Secretariat should be asked if the report of the Special Rapporteur should be considered null and void, and if the draft resolution should have its first paragraph removed. The Special Rapporteur had submitted a report saying he was being prevented from doing his job. Given that, the Commission could have adopted a motion. But with regard to substance, the Special Representative was not able to go to Equatorial Guinea, so he went to Spain. Why Spain? Because there were people there who opposed Equatorial Guinea. In the report, the Special Rapporteur said he met all the elements of opposition to the Government of Equatorial Guinea. This report did not appear to be very serious, and Algeria requested the legal opinions of those qualified to give them to determine if this was admissible. This was a dangerous precedent for all Member States. This way of working should not be able to continue. Why was it when underdeveloped countries had problems, it was called "corruption", in developed countries it was called "abuse of social property"? In underdeveloped countries, there was a tendency to refer to "nepotism", but in developed countries it was called a "good use of human resources?"

A Representative of Belgium, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the European Union had expressed its serious concern over the fact that the Special Representative was not allowed to visit Equatorial Guinea during the last year. The European Union wished to reiterate its call to that State to cooperate with the Special Representative and to make full use of his observations and advice as regards the human rights situation. The Commission was not acting on the deficiencies of technical assistance but on deficiencies in human rights. The State had been receiving technical and advisory assistance from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The country should receive technical assistance to implement a national plan of action on human rights.

In a resolution (E/CN.4/2001/L.32) on the situation of human rights in Rwanda, adopted by a roll-call vote of 28 in favour to 16 against and with 9 abstentions, the Commission took note with great satisfaction of the report of the Special Representative of the Commission to the General Assembly and its addendum submitted to the Commission; took note of the agreement signed by the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the National Commission for Human Rights of Rwanda, and called upon the Office of the High Commissioner to respond to any requests made by the Government of Rwanda for technical assistance and advisory services in the field of human rights; recommended that the international community continue to provide assistance for the development of Rwanda to ensure, in the long term, its recovery and stability; decided to end the mandate of the Special Representative; and decided to end its consideration of the situation of human rights in Rwanda.

The Commission had also had before it L.58 which was a proposed amendment to L.32 and which would have had the Commission extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Rwanda. For procedural reasons, the amendment was not considered.

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

In favour (28): Algeria, Burundi, Cameroon, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Indonesia, Kenya, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Viet Nam and Zambia.

Against (16): Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Spain and United Kingdom.

Abstentions (9): Brazil, Ecuador, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, United States, Uruguay and Venezuela.

A Representative of Canada said Rwanda had made great strides in recent years. It was regrettable that the Special Representative had decided he would not continue with his efforts, although he had said he would avail himself to his successor. The Special Representative did express a number of areas of continuing concern. It was believed that a Special Representative could play an important role, and could offer recommendations which could be valuable to the Government of Rwanda and to the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Special Representative had now said he would continue in his role if the mandate was extended for another year by consensus. Unfortunately, the African Group had rejected the proposed amendment to extend the mandate. Because of this, amendments would be offered to draft resolution L.58 that would extend the mandate. It was then hoped that this would be adopted by consensus.

A Representative of Rwanda recalled that seven years ago a genocide had taken place in his country. The genocide had implied acts of non-assistance to persons endangered. Rwanda continued to be a laboratory for human rights assistance with all sorts of human rights monitors present in the territory. The Government had set up a commission to study how to get further technical assistance. Rwanda had been considered by the Commission as part of the international community's concern about the state of affairs in the country. The amendment presented under L.58 suggested that the human rights situation in Rwanda should continue to be considered under agenda item 9. In 1993, it was indicated that a genocide was to take place in Rwanda. At that time Canada and other States had been aware of the situation. The amendment presented by Canada under L.58 suggested that it had only arrived after the genocide had taken place, a genocide aimed at annihilating the whole Tutsi population.

The genocide in Rwanda started in 1959 when the Belgians were still in Rwanda. It was to be recalled that the genocide had been widespread; and it had culminated in the genocide of 1994. The people of Rwanda had suffered most from the genocide. The international community should come to the people and help them to build their country. In April 1994, the international troops stationed in Rwanda did not prevent the act of genocide.

A Representative of Canada said his country, in 1994, had asked for a special session of the Commission on Rwanda. Canadians had played an important role in the United Nations forces in that country. Canada requested a roll-call vote.

A Representative of Guatemala said his country was for years subjected to Commission mechanisms; advisers and Special Rapporteurs had visited Guatemala and helped it to overcome the situation. Rwanda, for several years, had been observed by the Commission, and it had been given advice. The report of the Special Representative indicated the openness and cooperation that Rwanda had shown to these efforts, which recently really should have been under agenda item 19. However, Guatemala thought there was no longer a need to spend time on Rwanda that would be better spent on situations deserving serious consideration. Guatemala found the draft resolution submitted by the African Group acceptable, without amendments.

A Representative of Mexico said that the case of Rwanda was a good example that effective human rights promoting measures could be quickly implemented. The Government of Rwanda should be thanked for the efforts it made in the area of improving the human rights situation. Technical assistance had also played an important role in the promotion and protection of human rights in the country.

A Representative of Algeria said the Commission had to hear the voice of the people, people who had suffered much. Mediation between Ethiopia and Eritrea had shown considerable progress, and could serve as an example for the rest of Africa. Delegations should not come here and confront each other with situations that were presented in a biased and piecemeal way. There was no reference in the documentation about the hearings in the United States Congress, during which there was testimony about USAID. This information could have helped the Commission understand the depth of the tragedy in Rwanda. Rwanda had made strides in establishing domestic peace. It needed the Commission to help it make progress toward reconstruction and reconciliation. Algeria hoped the proposal would be supported.

A Representative of Burundi said the draft resolution on Rwanda had resulted from the findings of the Special Representative's report, which had indicated that the Commission's procedure on Rwanda under item 9 was no longer justified, especially as the Special Representative had also announced that he would not continue in his post. Burundi called for all members of the Commission to support the draft resolution on Rwanda.

A Representative of Belgium, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the European Union hoped the mandate of the Special Representative on the human rights situation in Rwanda would be continued. The report of the Special Representative had indicated concerns in the area of prisons where overcrowding was a problem.


In a measure on the question of human rights in Cyprus, the Commission decided, without a vote, to retain on its agenda sub-item (a), entitled "Question of human rights in Cyprus", of the item entitled "Question of the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in any part of the world", and to give it due priority at its fifty-eighth session, it being understood that action required by previous resolutions of the Commission on the subject would continue to remain operative, including the request to the Secretary-General to submit a report to the Commission regarding their implementation.




* *** *