COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS BEGINS DEBATE ON QUESTION OF VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD

Commission on Human Rights
58th session
8 April 2002
Morning



High Level Officials of Libya, German Parliament, and Pakistan Deliver Addresses
The Commission on Human Rights began its debate this morning of alleged violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms in any part of the world -- annually among its most contentious agenda items -- and heard allegations of abuses in numerous countries and regions along with charges that developing countries were unfairly singled out for such criticism by the Commission.
National delegations expressed concern over human rights situations in Myanmar, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, East Timor, parts of South Eastern Europe, Iran, Iraq, occupied Palestine, Chechnya, the Balkans, Sudan, Zimbabwe, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, China, Sierra Leone, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Viet Nam, Cuba, Burundi, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Guatemala, Haiti, Indonesia, Pakistan, Rwanda, Togo, Uganda, the United States, the Czech Republic, Great Britain, "occupied" Azerbaijan, and Cyprus.
Concern about a country-specific approach to human rights matters was expressed by several nations, including Japan, which cautioned that criticism and reproach alone were insufficient because they bred resentment and recalcitrance in the accused, and Cuba, which contended that about 20 countries of the "South" were targeted year after year while the countries of the "rich" industrialized North were never subject to such humiliation.
The Commission also heard addresses from three high-level Government officials.
Abdurrahman Mohamed Shalgam, Secretary of the General People's Committee for External Liaisons and International Cooperation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, described national efforts to promote economic growth and citizens' well-being, expressed concern that global anti-terrorism efforts were unfairly targeting Muslims and Arabs and people legitimately engaged in struggles for self-determination, and called for an end to economic sanctions against Libya.
Christa Nickels, Member of the German Parliament and Chairperson of its Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights and Humanitarian Aid, expressed support for efforts to eliminate capital punishment and eradicate torture worldwide. She cautioned that States with problematic human rights situations would not be given a human rights "bonus" just because they were participating in the fight against international terrorism -- that human rights violations must not be legitimized under the pretext of combatting terrorism, nor should security measures create gaps in the system of safeguarding human rights, nor should military measures against terrorists be exempt from international humanitarian law.
Attiya Inayatullah, Minister for Women's Development, Social Welfare and Special Education of Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said the OIC had condemned the terrorist attacks of 11 September and had stressed that these acts were contrary to the tolerant message of Islam. But the OIC rejected attempts at creating any linkage between Islam and terrorist acts, the Minister said; it rejected the targeting of any Islamic or Arab State under the pretext of fighting terrorism; and it was gravely concerned over the recent full-scale invasion and reoccupation of Palestinian territories by the Israeli defense forces.
Commission Chairman Krzysztof Jakubowski announced that after considering in closed meetings the human-rights situations in five countries, the Commission had decided to discontinue consideration of situations in Nigeria, Togo and Zambia. It had decided to keep pending its consideration of situations in Chad and Liberia. The Commission would make no reference in the public debate to the confidential decisions and materials relating to matters in those five countries. The Commission's review was carried out under the confidential mechanism established by Economic and Social Council resolutions 1503 (XLVIII) and 2000/3.
Also providing statements during the morning meeting were representatives of Spain (on behalf of the European Union), Canada, the Republic of Korea, Guatemala, Algeria, Indonesia, Pakistan, Argentina, China, Syria, Bahrain, and Poland.
Togo, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and Iraq spoke in exercise of the right of reply.
The Commission will reconvene at 3 p.m. to continue its review of the question of human rights violations anywhere in the world.
Question of the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in any part of the world
Under this agenda item the Commission has before it a series of documents.
There is a report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (E/CN.4/2002/37) on the situation of human rights in Sierra Leone which has among its conclusions that the peace process in the country has advanced considerably; that steady progress in its implementation has "added a new dynamism to the security situation"; that disarmament has been concluded and the Government has declared the end of armed conflict; that the country is preparing for elections in May; that attacks on civilians and skirmishes between opposing military factions have continued intermittently -- they are not systematic but nonetheless represent serious violations of human rights; and that while violations against civilians appear less prevalent, the extent of previous violations and abuses is gradually becoming clear as the rebel Revolutionary United Front relinquishes control of parts of the country and practical indices of serious crimes -- such as mass graves -- are discovered.
There is a report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation in the Chechen Republic of the Russian Federation (E/CN.4/2002/38) which concludes, among other things, that an independent, wide-ranging inquiry commensurate with the scale of allegations of serious human rights abuses in the region has not been carried out, although the Government of the Russian Federation has established a number of constructive mechanisms; that reports of serious human rights violations by Chechen fighters against authorities and civilians continue; that while Russian authorities advise that considerable funds have been allocated to improve the economic and social infrastructure of Chechnya, the situation remains a matter of serious concern; that there has been no significant return of displaced persons; that humanitarian agencies continue to be severely restricted in their activities, primarily because of security reasons; and that visits by the special procedures of the Commission could play a vital role in promoting and protecting human rights in Chechnya.
There is a report of the Secretary-General (E/CN.4/2002/33) on the situation in Cyprus which states among other things that a 10 May 2001 decision of the European Court of Human Rights found Turkey to have violated 14 articles of the European Convention on Human Rights in relation to a range of issues, including the rights of Greek Cypriots to return to their homes and properties in northern Cyprus, and the rights to freedom of religion and expression of Greek Cypriots living in the north; that a 23 May 2001 decision by the same Court found the Government of Cyprus to have violated the European Convention in relation to the prohibition of inhumane treatment and to the rights to liberty, security and freedom of movement of a group of Turkish Cypriots living in the south; that on 26 June of 2001 the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted an interim resolution deploring the fact that Turkey had not yet complied with its obligations in the case of Loizidou v. Turkey decided by the European Court. The report concludes "It should be stressed that the human rights situation in Cyprus would be transformed by the achievement of a comprehensive settlement".
There is a report of the Secretary-General on reports of intimidation and reprisals against private individuals and groups who sought to cooperate with the United Nations and representatives of its human rights bodies (E/CN.4/2002/36) which states that reported acts of reprisal ranged from harassment, dismissal from employment, threats and arbitrary arrests to ill-treatment or torture in detention. The report reviews allegations related to reported incidents in Uzbekistan, Sudan, Morocco, Mauritania, Tunisia, and Togo, and summarizes Government replies to requests for information where they were supplied.
There is a letter (E/CN.4/2002/150) dated 13 March 2002 from the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations Office at Geneva addressed to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights containing the observations of the Government of Turkey pertaining to the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Cyprus v. Turkey.
There is a note verbale (E/CN.4/2002/156) dated 7 March 2002 from the Permanent Mission of Azerbaijan to the United Nations Office at Geneva addressed to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights containing a statement of the Azerbaijan Parliament, and appeal to the United Nations by the surviving inhabitants of Khojaly and an appeal to the peoples of the world and heads of States on the tenth anniversary of the genocide in Khojaly.
There is a letter (E/CN.4/2002/157) dated 19 March from the Permanent Representative of Singapore to the United Nations Office at Geneva addressed to the Chairperson of the fifty-eight session of the Commission on Human Rights. The letter consists of a response to the allegation made by the Asian Legal Resource Centre against the Singapore Government on the use of the Internal Security Act, prosecution and juridical system, defamation charges against opposition leaders and amendments to the Broadcasting Authority Act.
There is a note verbale (E/CN.4/2002/158) dated 27 March from the Permanent Mission of Myanmar to the United Nations Office at Geneva addressed to the secretariat of the Commission on Human Rights, consisting of a memorandum concerning the situation of human rights in Myanmar.
There is a letter (E/CN.4/2002/3) from the Permanent Representative of Cyprus to the High Commissioner for Human Rights appending a copy of the European Court of Human Rights decision of 10 May 2001.
There is a letter (E/CN.4/2002/124) from the Permanent Representative of Cyprus to the High Commissioner for Human Rights alleging destruction and desecration of churches in Turkish occupied villages in the district of Kyrenia.
There is a letter (E/CN.4/2002/144) from the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the High Commissioner for Human Rights contesting the Cypriot charge of destruction and desecration of churches.
There are notes verbale from the Permanent Mission of Iraq to the High Commissioner for Human Rights opposing the text of the Commission's 2001 resolution on the situation in Iraq (E/CN.4/2002/4); calling attention to newspaper articles alleging that a United States Senator had committed war crimes during the Viet Nam conflict (E/CN.4/2002/10); and calling for a condemnation of air assaults committed by the United States against Iraq on 19 June 2001 (E/CN.4/2002/9), charging that bombs fell on a football stadium, killing 23 young people and wounding many others.
There is a note verbale from the Permanent Mission of Kuwait to the High Commissioner for Human Rights (E/CN.4/2002/151) responding to the Iraqi "explanatory note"on the Commission's 2001 resolution on the situation of human rights in Iraq.
There is a letter from the Permanent Mission of Azerbaijan to the High Commissioner for Human Rights (E/CN.4/2002/151) offering "evidence from independent sources" and charging human rights violations were committed by Armenian armed forces in Khojaly in 1992.
And there is a report of the Secretary-General on the human rights situation of Lebanese detainees in Israel (E/CN.4/2002/34) stating that the Commission's 2001 resolution on the subject was brought to the attention of the Government of Israel, as requested, and that no reply was received from Israel.

Statements
ABDURRAHMAN MOHAMED SHALGAM, Secretary of the General People's Committee for External Liaisons and International Cooperation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, said that in Libya, there was no ruler and ruled, no master and slave. Power was in the hands of the people, and they wielded it through people's congresses that made decisions, and people's committees that implemented what was decided. Hundreds of schools, institutes, and universities had been constructed and education was free at all levels.
Citizenship in Libya was a sacred right. Men and women had equal rights and enjoyed the freedom of association and established federations, trade unions and occupational associations. Women in Libya were accorded special importance and Libyan legislation assigned equal status to women.
Libya strongly condemned terrorism, but still believed the most effective way to fight terrorism was to agree on a single definition of terrorism, so as to track its root causes and determine effective methods of response. Libya strongly rejected attempts in some circles to associate terrorism with Islam and Arabs. It categorically refused the characterization of people's struggle for independence as terrorism. Was it possible to describe those Palestinians who were defending their land and their honour as terrorists? Was it not true that the real terrorists were those who usurped the land of Palestine, displaced its people and subjected them to the worst forms of punishment and torture?
Libya had suffered greatly from the unilateral economic sanctions that had been imposed upon it, the Foreign Minister said. Worse still was that the State involved had taken such measures against Libya for almost twenty years and had also resorted to international bodies to unjustly punish Libya in the name of the United Nations. Despite clear and public statements by most countries that they were not persuaded by the reasons for which the sanctions were imposed, they had not been lifted. This was due to the intransigence of the United States, which had dissuaded the Security Council from taking this step for no apparent reason except the furtherance of its own interests and ends. With regard to the Scottish Court of Appeals and the Pan Am accident over Lockerbie, the Commission was appealed to support the release of Abdulbaset Al-Megrahi, who was convicted for political reasons, and to affirm that if he remained in detention he would be considered a "political hostage" by all applicable international laws and standards. The Commission was also urged to support the immediate lifting of sanctions imposed unjustly on the Libyan people, and to support compensation for the human and material damage that had been inflicted by the sanctions.
CHRISTA NICKELS, Member of the German Bundestag (Parliament) and Chairperson of the Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights and Humanitarian Aid, said the German Parliament had in 1998 set up the committee to watch over human rights in Germany as well as abroad. On international matters the committee relied to a great extent on the work of the Commission on Human Rights. Members of the post-war generation in Europe lived with a fundamental sense that democratic civil society based on the rule of law was an everlasting, guaranteed basic constant. Gradually, however, it was becoming clear that each generation must for itself make sure of and safeguard achievements such as human rights. That was why the global trend towards the abolition of the death penalty was welcomed. In countries where this form of punishment had not yet been abolished and there was no moratorium on the implementation of death sentences, at least the minimum standards needed to be respected. No execution of pregnant women! No executions of mentally disabled people! No executions of anyone who was underage at the time the crime was committed!
The worldwide outlawing of torture -- a matter of deep concern to Germans in light of the despicable acts committed under the Third Reich -- was also far from established, Ms. Nickels said. Children and women in particular had increasingly been victims of torture in recent years. The German Bundestag was endeavouring to prevent the production, trade, export and use of instruments of torture and hoped the Commission would take steps in this direction, too.
States with problematic human rights situations would not be given a human rights "bonus" just because they were participating in the fight against international terrorism, Ms. Nickels said. Furthermore, human right violations must not be legitimized under the pretext of combatting terrorism. Security measures must not create new gaps in the system safeguarding human rights; nor could military measures against terrorists be exempt from international humanitarian law. Germany rejected the sole domination of interior and external security concerns over human rights. Human rights were not only threatened by 11 September; they were also threatened by the dramatic development of globalization. Human rights needed to be defended against both dangers.
ATTIYA INAYATULLAH, Minister for Women's Development, Social Welfare and Special Education of Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said that at the meeting of Foreign Ministers of the members of the Conference in Doha, Qatar, they had strongly condemned the terrorist attacks of 11 September and underscored the necessity of cracking down on the perpetrators. OIC States had stressed that these acts were contrary to the tolerant message of Islam and had rejected attempts at creating any linkage between Islam and these terrorist acts. They had rejected the targeting of any Islamic or Arab State under the pretext of fighting terrorism. The full-scale invasion and reoccupation of Palestinian territories by the Israeli defense forces over the past 18 months, causing over a thousand deaths and wounding many more, had been a source of deep anguish for the Islamic world.
The OIC considered the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories as the principal reason for the deterioration in the situation in the occupied territories and strongly condemned Israel's use of force and its attempts to undermine Palestinian national institutions and elected leadership. The OIC called upon the international community to put an end to Israeli aggression. It called for the full implementation of resolution 425 and the withdrawal of Israel from all occupied Lebanese territories including the Shebaa farms. The OIC also welcomed the installation of the Afghan Interim Authority; condemned the continuing massive violations of human rights of Kashmiri people; remained concerned about the difficulties encountered by Bosnian returnees in Bosnia and Herzegovina; remained concerned about the occupation of Azerbaijani territories; expressed sympathy for the suffering of the Iraqi people; called for an early resolution to the problems of prisoners and missing people from Kuwait; expressed its firm support for the right cause of the Turkish Muslim people of Cyprus; and called upon the Commission to adopt concrete measures to alleviate the suffering and plight of the Muslim people.
JOAQUIN PEREZ-VILLANUEVA Y TOVAR (Spain), speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU), said the European Union took action in favour of human rights initiatives at all levels. It was still particularly concerned at situations of human rights in Burma/Myanmar, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, East Timor, Iran, Iraq, the Occupied Palestinian territories, Chechnya, parts of South Eastern Europe, Sudan and Zimbabwe. In Afghanistan, EU welcomed the prospects opened to Afghans in the new political period and would continue to support efforts at reconciliation and reconstruction. The EU was deeply alarmed by the grave deterioration of the situation in the Middle East and had called for the immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement, and destruction. It urged respect for human rights and the rule of law.
Concern was felt about the continued and serious human rights violations in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea; the EU would continue to follow the evolution of the situation with a view to considering appropriate action in the relevant fora, including the next session of the Commission. The transformation of China's economy and ongoing reform of the Chinese judicial and legal systems had led to significant improvements in China. However, the European Union was still concerned about continuing violations of human rights there. The Union strongly advocated the universal abolition of capital punishment, which was cruel, inhuman and degrading. States that maintained this form of punishment were urged at least not to apply it to persons below 18 years of age at the time of commission of the crime, to pregnant women or new mothers, or to persons suffering from mental disorders.
MARIE GERVAIS-VIDRICAIRE (Canada) said it was time for the international community to converge on the situation in Zimbabwe to prevent a deterioration of the human rights situation that could spill over into neighbouring countries. In Sierra Leone, completion of the disarmament process and the upcoming elections were significant events. However, the situation of displaced populations and allegations concerning sexual violence and exploitation were causes for concern. In Sudan, it was of paramount importance that all efforts be made to ensure the safety and security of civilians, including humanitarian workers. It was hoped that the increased engagement on human rights issues in Saudi Arabia would translate into an administration of justice that was consistent with human rights standards.
Canada remained very concerned about the situation in Iraq, where the Government continued to show a complete disregard for the rights and dignity of its citizens. The human rights situation in Iran continued to deteriorate. Concern was felt over the human rights situation in Afghanistan. The recent moves made towards a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Sri Lanka were welcome. Serious concern was felt over the persistent scale and scope of restrictions on freedom of expression, association, press and religion in China, especially in Tibet and Xinjiang, and about the application of the death penalty for non-violent crimes. Viet Nam was urged to take measures to ensure freedom of expression and religion. Deep concern was felt about credible reports of human rights violations against civilians by both sides in the conflict in the Republic of Chechnya. In Colombia, there was impunity and continued lack of respect for international humanitarian law. Cuba used legal restrictions, detention, harassment and imprisonment of individuals to deter activities that were legitimate within its international human rights commitments. Concern also was felt over situations in the Balkans, Burma, Burundi, Cambodia, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Guatemala, Haiti, Indonesia, East Timor, Pakistan, Rwanda, Togo and Uganda.
CHUNG EUI-YONG (the Republic of Korea) said that in the face of continuing gross violations of human rights and crimes against humanity, punishments still remained unsatisfactory. Putting an end to the culture of impunity would be an important first step in efforts to eradicate violations of and crimes against human rights. The terrorist attacks of 11 September, which had generated fears about global peace and security, were an affront to human dignity and also constituted crimes against humanity. The collective measures taken by the international community to protect the lives and freedoms of innocent individuals from terror were in fact measures to safeguard the most fundamental of human rights. At the same time, respect for fundamental human rights should be an integral part of the international community's efforts to fight terrorism.
While the spread of democracy and human rights had become a global trend, there were still a number of regimes that persisted in committing serious violations of human rights. In those regimes, there were such abuses as arbitrary execution and repression of the freedoms of thought, religion, and movement. In some cases, the failure of closed economic, systems had resulted in deprivation of the basic means of life. Facing impoverishment and starvation, many people were forced to cross borders in search of food, often risking their lives. The lives and fundamental human rights of such people should be duly protected, and the international community was urged to continue to accord that matter its full attention.
YASUAKI NOGAWA (Japan) said the individual circumstances of a country's history, culture, religion, and tradition brought to bear their own unique consequences that must be approached with appropriate understanding. Respect and tolerance of these circumstances were essential to instilling freedom, justice and peace. However, they must never be used as an excuse for rationalizing the suppression of human rights.
How did one approach specific human rights cases in individual countries? Criticism and reproach alone were insufficient because they bred resentment and recalcitrance in the accused. Human rights situations could be improved through dialogue and positive encouragement rather than high-handed denunciation. Japan had been taking just such an approach through its bilateral dialogues on human rights with a number of countries. These dialogues had improved understanding on how Governments dealt with their respective human rights situations, which in turn enabled the honing of Japan's approach to extended cooperation. One such means of cooperation was the Partnership for Democratic Development, launched at the G7/G8 Lyon Summit in 1996. Japan urged all States to approach all human rights situations positively on the basis of the three principles of "dialogue, understanding, and mutual respect".
ANTONIO ARENALES FORNO (Guatemala) said his country believed item 9 was the most effective mechanism for protecting human rights. After initial resistance, States had finally accepted being kept under review and had undertaken internal changes in favour of democratization and respect for human rights. Not all countries with serious human rights violations been considered by the Commission and not all countries that were considered by the Commission needed to be considered. Guatemala was trying to consolidate its young democracy and was striving to promote human rights. It had been under review in terms of the 1503 procedure and was still under public scrutiny.
Guatemala had requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to keep a permanent office in the country and had extended an open invitation to all the Commission's thematic mechanisms, including Special Rapporteurs and independent experts, to visit the country. Guatemala's faith in and collaboration with conventional and non-conventional treaty bodies, including the Commission, gave it the moral authority to express its dismay at the lack of similar cooperation on the part of many States. Some countries had indicated that they would present a resolution on Guatemala if it did not moderate its position on certain issues. Guatemala rejected this attitude, which destroyed the credibility and the effectiveness of the Commission.
IVAN MORA GODOY (Cuba) said year after year, sitting on the defendants' bench as if they were subject to a trial before relentless prosecutors, about 20 countries were targeted by resolutions. Almost all were located in the so-called South -- they were African or Asian -- and the prosecutors were always countries of the rich and industrialized North. The Commission had never in its history produced the slightest condemnation for those more than evident, and in many cases massive, violations of such human rights in the so-called "democracies" of the developed world. Why didn't these self-appointed champions of human rights take the same initiative against the Government of the United States, whose violations of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms of millions of its own citizens was public, notorious and widely documented?
After a decisive defeat suffered by the United States in 1998 in connection with the initiative that annually criticized Cuba, Washington had not found any other alternative than to hire another member State of the Commission to do it dirty work. That was the role played by the Czech Republic from 1999 until last year. This accomplice supported the United States in its vendetta against Cuba and helped it to supposedly justify the genocidal blockade imposed against Cuba for more than four decades. Cuba opposed and would oppose any unfair and sterile resolution against Cuba, whatever it might say and whoever presented it.
MOHAMED-SALAH DEMBRI (Algeria) said human rights were not ambiguous. Human rights defence must not become a field of antagonism between the North and the South. The international community must cooperate to prevent the exacerbation of social tensions and must act to promote democracy. The EU list of countries accused of human rights violations was longer than last year, totalling 64 countries. This showed that the situation of human rights, rather than improved, had deteriorated in many parts of the world.
It should be noted, however, that no European country was included in that list. Yet in several cities of Great Britain, racism and segregation had reached unsustainable levels. The situation of the Roma minority in the Czech Republic was a another cause for concern. In many African countries corruption was rife. It was regrettable that certain European judges considered that the severest punishment against Pinochet should be to prohibit him from wearing a military uniform due to his senility.
NUGROHO WISNUMURTI (Indonesia) said human rights violations were not confined to certain countries or certain continents; they could appear in subtle and perverse forms in many a country which believed itself to be above reproach. Indonesia, for its part, had concentrated on consolidating its democratic process by actively implementing reform. The Government was giving top priority to measures designed to comprehensively address the separatist movements in Aceh and Papua, as well as the communal conflicts in Poso, Central Sulawesi, and in the Moluccas, thereby reducing and eventually eliminating cases of human rights violations in those areas. The Government reiterated its position, which was one of respect for the path chosen by East Timor. It was determined to forget past differences and to forge new ties with the leaders and future leaders of East Timor. On the important matter of past human rights abuses, Indonesia continued to do everything in its power to bring all violators to justice.
The Indonesian Government had made real progress in addressing the separatist movements in the provinces of Aceh and Papua. Serious efforts had been made to address past wrongs and to heal the wounds caused by years of strife and violence by fostering reconciliation and dialogue. As part of a comprehensive solution to those problems, the Government had granted both Aceh and Papua special autonomy status. In Sulawesi and the Moluccas, the outbursts of violence which had erupted sporadically between the Muslim and Christian communities since 1999 had now subsided. The Government had consistently pursued its goal of promoting awareness of and respect for human rights. Despite sporadic bouts of violence which had shaken certain provinces, the socio-cultural fabric of the country remained basically intact.
HORACIO SOLARI (Argentina) said that regrettably the human rights situation in Cyprus had not been solved since the fifty-seventh session of the Commission. The Commission had been considering the question of Cyprus for 25 years and everything indicated that it would be necessary to continue reviewing it in the future. Argentina gave full support to the good offices mission of the Secretary-General and hoped that, in compliance with Security Council resolutions, a solution would be reached based on one State of Cyprus with one sovereignty, citizenship and international personality, whose independence and territorial integrity were not jeopardized and whose two communities were placed on equal footing in political terms.
Argentina supported the freedom of movement of persons, their right to return to their homes and property and their right to decide on their place of residence. In sum, Argentina expressed its full support for the full implementation of the Commission's resolutions on these issues and urged that they be implemented.
SHA ZUKANG (China) said almost all country-specific resolutions adopted under this item were targeted against developing countries. This left people with a false impression that human rights problems were the "patent" of developing countries while developed countries were impeccable. Only by abandoning double standards and restoring the principle of equality could the Commission expect to keep its objectivity and fairness. In China, in an effort to build up democracy and the rule of law, the Government had adopted 10 laws and regulations. New legislation and reforms were of great significance for enhancing labour protection and ensuring fairness in the administration of justice. A system of legal aid had been put in place in all provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions and there were now 2,274 legal aid agencies in the country. The Government was also open and active in promoting international exchanges and cooperation in the field of human rights. China welcomed all well-intentioned cooperation and assistance but stood firmly against any vicious slandering and defamation.
Claims that the Chinese Government restricted freedom of speech and association were untrue -- the Constitution explicitly provided for freedom of speech, publication, assembly and association. It had been alleged that there was no religious freedom in China -- this was untrue. The fact was that there were five major religions practised in China, with a total of more that 100 million believers. All religions were equal in China and they coexisted in peace and harmony. Allegations regarding Tibet and Xinjiang were also misinformed. As for the Falun Gong, it was an evil cult which advocated worshipping a cult leader, spread a doomsday theory, and dissuaded its followers from seeking medication and encouraged them to commit collective self-immolation.
FAYSAL KHABBAZ-HAMOUI (Syria) said that under agenda item 9 there was a long list of developed countries condemning the developing countries. The Western countries were silent concerning the Israeli violations of the rights of Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. A number of Syrians, Lebanese and Palestinians were actually detained by Israel; they were denied their basic rights; and Israel continued to violate their right to education. The allegations of human rights abuses made by the European Union were only directed at the developing countries. The flagrant violations of human rights committed by Israel were passed over in silence.
Minorities, be they Black or Latin Americans, living in the West were subject to discrimination. Similarly, the Western countries did not even want to hear the voices of the victims of discrimination which were manifested during the World Conference against Racism. Although the European Union was founded on humanitarian values, its targeting of developing countries in this case was unacceptable.
SAEED MOHAMED AL-FAIHANI (Bahrain) said violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms were among the worst forms of evil. Respect for these rights should be a high priority for States, societies and individuals. The Government of Bahrain had embarked on a comprehensive programme to promote human rights and fundamental freedoms. It guaranteed human rights, popular political participation, freedom of expression, establishment of Constitutional institutions, and women's political and civil rights.
Many steps had been taken during the past two years. These had included the release of all prisoners held for offences against national security, the return of Bahrainians living abroad, the repeal of the State Security Law, and the establishment of a human rights committee with a wide-ranging mandate. These steps had been strengthened with the establishment of a Supreme Council for Judiciary, which was intended to further safeguard the independence of judges and the integrity of the judicial process. Throughout the implementation of this comprehensive programme, the role of women had been highlighted. Bahrain was proud to have appointed women in senior positions in the public and private sectors, including under secretaries as well as an Ambassador.
TOMASZ KNOTHE (Poland) said that over time the international community had achieved, despite difficulties and obstacles, substantial progress in promoting human rights and making them accepted nationally and internationally. One of the most recent manifestations of this process was the establishment and development of international courts and tribunals. It was a paradox that despite the constant development of human rights instruments, violations remained a major concern. There were too many instances of disrespect for human rights. There were too many places in the world where gross violations of human rights were occurring. The Commission must ensure that the gap between obligation and implementation was narrowed. Constructive dialogue, cooperation and technical assistance would contribute to this process.
Poland was very sensitive to the question of sovereignty, as its sovereign rights had been too often brutally abused and subjected to foreign interference. At the same time, Poland was in full agreement with the view that no State had the right to hide violations of human rights behind the principle of sovereignty. Poland shared a deep concern with the European Union over the concrete situations of human rights in many parts of the world. The list of those situations was unfortunately long. The Commission had a duty to discuss these situations.
KHALID RANJHA (Pakistan) said the massacres in the Indian State of Gujarat were the direct outcome of the endeavour to whip up anti-Muslim sentiments in order to revive flagging political support of the ruling party in India. Over a thousand Muslims were murdered in organized pogroms conducted by the VHP and other Hindu militant organizations with the collusion of the Gujarat Chief Minister. Muslims remained under threat in Gujarat, as in many other places in India, as evident from the killings of several days ago. A conflagration would have erupted had the Indian Supreme Court granted the Government's request to hold a so-called symbolic Hindu ceremony on the site of the destroyed Ayodhya Mosque. The High Commissioner should be urged to appoint a UN inquiry commission to investigate and report on the Gujarat pogrom and to recommend measures to assure the protection of the fundamental rights of Muslims in India.
India had sought to take advantage of the post-September war against terrorism and Pakistani's concern on its Western frontiers to intensify its military and diplomatic campaign to suppress the legitimate struggle of the people of Jammu and Kashmir to exercise their right to self-determination. To oblige Pakistan to compromise its principled position on Kashmir, India had deployed virtually its entire million-man army on Pakistan's border, ready to launch an aggression at any time. Its nuclear capable missiles had been proclaimed to be in battle-ready positions. Pakistan had been obliged to take up defensive positions. But it had acted with restraint. Unfortunately, India seemed intent on seeking a military solution to the Jammu and Kashmir crisis. Indian repression in Kashmir had intensified.

Rights of Reply
A Representative of Togo, speaking in right of reply, said that from the statement of the EU, it appeared that it was only in the South that human rights violations were committed. The representative of Algeria had already denounced this short-sighted attitude. Violations of human rights in the EU included cases of forced expulsions of Africans, detentions at airports and discriminatory anti-terrorist measures against Arabs. In Togo, the freedom of the press was guaranteed, but it was also controlled to prevent the publication of lies and personal attacks.
A Representative of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, speaking in right of reply, said in response to the statement of the European Union that the summit between the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the European Union in May of last year had provided an important opportunity to further develop and expand bilateral relations and accelerate realistic dialogue and cooperation. As a result, the DPRK-EU relationship was now developing in many areas. Human rights were no exception, and the DPRK had been responding very seriously and in a manner of genuine cooperation to any issues raised by the EU. There had been a series of human rights contacts and there had been cooperation, the exchange of views, and the participation of DPRK experts in human rights training carried out under the auspices of the EU. In spite of this reality, there had been harsh criticism of the DPRK this morning by the representative of the EU. This was a reflection of the biased approach taken toward the system of the DPRK. It was the sovereign right of every State and nation to freely choose its own ideology and social system. Violating this right to choose was in breach of acknowledged principles of international law.
A Representative of Iraq, speaking in right of reply, said the statement made by the Canadian delegation had noted that the economic blockade of Iraq had led to the deaths of millions of children. The Canadian delegation had not taken into consideration the violation of other human rights of the Iraqi people through these economic sanctions. The World Health Organization had reported that the sanitary situation of the population of Iraq had been seriously affected. The Canadian delegation should have further included in its statement the other hardships encountered by the people of Iraq due to the economic embargo.



* *** *