Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Commission on Human Rights
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS HEARS STATEMENTS FROM 12 DIGNITARIES
16 March 2005
Share
Commission on Human Rights
MORNING
16 March 2005
Officials from Venezuela, Botswana, Guatemala,
Honduras, International Committee of Red Cross,
Viet Nam, Cuba, Japan, Austria, Nigeria, United Kingdom
and Colombia Speak
The Commission on Human Rights this morning continued its high-level segment and heard a series of statements from dignitaries representing Venezuela, Botswana, Guatemala, Honduras, the International Committee of the Red Cross, Viet Nam, Cuba, Japan, Austria, Nigeria, the United Kingdom and Colombia.
Some speakers highlighted their respective countries’ achievements in the promotion and protection of human rights, while others raised issues concerning the reform of the Commission, discrimination against women and trafficking in human beings.
Mary Pili Hernandez, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Venezuela, stressed that respect for human rights constituted a vocation for Venezuela whose Constitution was one of the most progressive texts in the world. Among other initiatives in support of human rights, national programmes had been implemented to guarantee the human rights of all citizens, particularly those who had traditionally been excluded from society.
Phandu T. C. Skelemani, Minister for Presidential Affairs and Public Administration of Botswana, said as part of an effort to ensure that the Constitution of Botswana afforded all citizens equal protection of their human rights and fundamental freedoms, a Constitutional (Amendment) Bill was currently being processed through Parliament which was aimed at amending some specific sections of the Constitution which were not truly neutral.
Marta Altolaguirre, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Guatemala said last December, the United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala - MINUGUA - had terminated its mission after ten years of presence in the country during which it had monitored the implementation of the peace agreement. During that decade, progress had been recorded in strengthening and consolidating a democratic society, particularly in the field of respect for human rights.
Jorge Hernandez Alcerro, Minister of Governance and Justice of Honduras, said everyone knew that poverty negatively affected the full enjoyment of human rights, particularly economic and social rights. As poverty was one of the greatest challenges facing Honduras, the Government had been prompted to implement a national poverty reduction strategy, which aimed to reorient and increase social spending, and to redesign social policy.
Jakob Kellenberger, President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said utmost vigilance and care remained important in responding to the needs of those affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. In 2004, ICRC delegates visited more than 573,000 detainees, held in more than 2,000 places of detention in about 80 countries.
Dao Viet Trung, Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs of Viet Nam, said human rights protection represented both a goal and a driving force in the cause of national construction, and it was Viet Nam’s consistent position to take a people-centered approach in its economic and social policies in which human rights promotion and protection were considered an important factor to achieve sustainable development in the process of the country’s industrialization and modernization.
Felipe Perez Roque, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba, said that the Commission on Human Rights had lost its legitimacy. It was not credible. The United States and its allies treated the Commission as their private property, turning it into an inquisition which condemned the countries of the South -- particularly those opposing their neocolonial agenda.
Itsunori Onodera, Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Japan, said Japan firmly believed that human rights were universal, and the notions of good governance, non-discrimination, the rule of law and democracy were universally shared. The Commission on Human Rights had been instrumental in bringing this awareness to all. Yet despite this universal awareness and the efforts of the international community and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, grave human rights violations still occurred throughout the world.
Hans Winkler, Deputy Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Austria, said his country attached great importance to the fight against trafficking in persons and was pursuing a holistic approach based on prevention, protection and prosecution. With regard to women, education was the best way to ensure their empowerment and the creation of opportunities.
Alhaji Abubakar Tanko, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Nigeria, said that the international dialogue on the promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights -- including the right to development – should be made more practical and should be expressed through the political and economic empowerment of individuals and societies.
Bill Rammell, Minister for International Human Rights of the United Kingdom, said the job of the Commission was to ensure that the voiceless, those who were hungry, weak or oppressed, were given a voice. The Commission should be a forum for cooperation, promoting and developing human rights standards, and providing, where needed, assistance to individual countries that requested it.
And Francisco Santos Calderon, Vice-President of Colombia, said the Government of Colombia had been able to reduce the rate of violence in the country since it came to power, thanks to the policies it had adopted to ensure the democratic process. Between 2003 and 2004, the rate of homicide had been reduced by 15 per cent. The number of massacres had also been reduced by 52 per cent. The rate of victims of kidnapping and forced displacement had also been brought down. The positive achievements were made following the strengthening of the presence of the law enforcement forces and civilian authorities over the territory.
At the end of the meeting, India, Thailand, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Zimbabwe, Japan and China exercised their right of reply.
When the Commission meets at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it is scheduled to hear addresses by the Minister for Human Rights of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Under-Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Lithuania, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs of Kenya, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan, the Director-General for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Council of Europe and Human Rights, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Romania, the Advisor (State Minister) for Foreign Affairs of Bangladesh, the Head of the Human Rights Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iraq, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Serbia and Montenegro, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria, and the Minister of Law, Justice and Human Rights of Pakistan.
Statements
MARY PILI HERNANDEZ, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Venezuela, stressed that respect for human rights constituted a vocation for Venezuela whose Constitution was one of the most progressive texts in the world. As it contained a special chapter devoted to human rights, the Government had necessarily undertaken to bring national legislation into conformity with that document. Among other initiatives in support of human rights, national programmes had been implemented to guarantee the human rights of all citizens, particularly those who had traditionally been excluded from society. These programmes were known as "missions", and aimed to improve the provision of health and education services, to reduce the price of food, and to enhance the participation of the indigenous population in economic and social life. As one could not speak of democracy without ensuring the active participation of all citizens, local planning councils had been established to enable individual townships to decide how to dispense their budgets. Overall, Venezuela had become a model of democracy for the international community.
Stating that the concept of representative democracy should remain part of the history of the twentieth century, Ms. Hernandez said the democracy of the twenty-first century should be participatory. Moreover, merely defending civil and political rights was not sufficient. Economic, social and cultural rights must also be promoted. To that end, the Government of Venezuela had worked at the regional level to support initiatives to promote these rights, and had supported the establishment of an international humanitarian fund, which aimed to find resources to ensure solidarity.
Turning to the issue of the reform of the United Nations, Ms. Hernandez said that the General Assembly must be confirmed as the Organization’s highest decision-making body, thereby reducing the excessive recourse to the Security Council. It was still necessary to expand membership of the Council, but that would still be insufficient to reflect the reality of the multi-polar world. The use of the veto should be eliminated, and the Security Council should cease to interfere on human rights matters. Those were directly the responsibility of the General Assembly. Furthermore, with regard to the fight against terrorism, Venezuela's Government reaffirmed its rejection of both terrorism and State terrorism that was perpetrated in the name of fighting terrorism.
PHANDU T. C. SKELEMANI, Minister for Presidential Affairs and Public Administration of Botswana, said the Government of Botswana attached great importance to the mandate of the Commission. To this end, Botswana was striving to meet its reporting obligations in respect of the various international human rights instruments to which it was a State Party. This came amidst constraints concerning human resources and institutional capacity. Botswana was committed to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and these rights were fully protected under the Constitution. Although Botswana had to date not produced a single refugee or asylum seeker, it continued to provide sanctuary to many refugees and asylum seekers from various African countries. Botswana pursued a policy which was aimed at facilitating the integration of refugees who wished to settle permanently in the country.
The full enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms required the active participation of both men and women as equal partners. To this end, measures had been taken in Botswana to amend those laws which discriminated against women. These developments fulfilled some of the key aspirations of the Beijing Conference. The implementation of the Declaration and Platform of Action of the Beijing Conference in Botswana had given birth to the National Gender Plan of Action. The main focus of this Plan was the education and health rights of the girl child as well as the active participation of women in all sectors of the economy and in decision-making positions.
As part of an effort to ensure that the Constitution afforded all citizens equal protection of their human rights and fundamental freedoms, a Constitutional (Amendment) Bill was currently being processed through Parliament, which was aimed at amending some specific sections of the Constitution which were not truly neutral. Botswana as an active player in the global village continued to play its part, whilst at the same time trying to maintain and protect its cultural values and norms. Botswana had faith in the viability of the Commission as an instrument for the protection of democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law, and therefore fully supported the Commission’s efforts to make this world a safer place for both present and future generations.
MARTA ALTOLAGUIRRE, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Guatemala, said last December, the United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala - MINUGUA - had terminated its mission after ten years of presence in the country during which it had monitored the implementation of the peace agreement. During that decade, progress had been recorded in strengthening and consolidating a democratic society, particularly in the field of respect for human rights. Taking the peace agreement as a basic agenda for public administration, a national commission for peace had been set up in which civil society was represented. A number of laws had also been adopted with the view to protecting and promoting human rights. The Government had also undertaken institutional reforms, including the reduction of the strength of the military. According to the peace agreement, the military had been reduced by 67 per cent and the military camps had been converted into educational and rehabilitation centres. The military was also modernized with the aim to serve in peacekeeping missions with the United Nations. The national police force had also been demilitarised and had been given a civilian character.
The bulk of the national budget had been allocated to social and educational developments. Additional measures had also been taken to strengthen the prosecutor’s office in matters of human rights. An independent commission had also been established to investigate complaints on human rights violations. The condition of women had been a matter of concern to the Government. In order to implement the Beijing Declaration, a series of measures had been taken to empower women and to provide them with employment and other social benefits. The equal opportunity of women had also been strengthened through the adoption of legal instruments. Further measures were also taken to protect women from any form of violence, including sexual violence.
The Government of Guatemala had declared 2005 the "National Year of Disappeared Persons" and had strengthened the administrative and legal provisions to protect victims of disappeared persons. The Government reiterated its invitation to all special rapports and representatives with regard to human rights to visit the country.
JORGE HERNANDEZ ALCERRO, Minister of Governance and Justice of Honduras, said everyone knew that poverty negatively affected the full enjoyment of human rights, particularly economic and social rights. As poverty was one of the greatest challenges facing Honduras, the Government had implemented a national poverty reduction strategy which aimed to reorient and increase social spending and to redesign social policy. While noting that the country had faced a violent wave of crime at the end of the last decade, the Honduran Minister summarized national efforts to combat that phenomenon in its various forms, including common crime, organized crime, and gangs linked to drug trafficking. Acts of true terrorism by gangs had obliged the Government to allocate major human resources to prevent their recurrence, and the country’s police, prosecutors and judges continued to work to deal with the problem, and to ensure security, within the framework of the Constitution and national legislation.
A significant reduction in levels of crime had been achieved, the Honduran Minister noted, and a national arms registration programme had been established, as had public policies to prevent children and adolescents from joining gangs. However, the Government remained concerned by the rate of violent death for children in the country’s cities. Thus, in 2002, a permanent commission for protection of the physical and moral integrity of children had been established, and a special investigation unit for deaths of minors had been created. Honduras remained firmly committed to combating and ending this serious problem.
The Government had also taken major steps to promote and protect human rights. A national council had been established which recommended policies, plans of action and specific measures to promote the exercise and dissemination of information on human rights. Moreover, within the context of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the President had publicly recognized the Government’s responsibility for the violation of human rights of individual citizens, and had reached agreement to compensate victims of human rights violations in the 1980s. Additionally, Honduras had made major progress at the national, legislative and institutional levels to prevent and punish all forms of violence against women, including through the promulgation of a law against domestic violence. Other national priorities included eradication of the scourge of human trafficking, and ensuring migrants’ rights.
JAKOB KELLENBERGER, President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said utmost vigilance and care remained important in responding to the needs of those affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. Protection of such persons in such situations lay at the heart of the work of ICRC. In particular, this statement would focus on ICRC's duty to protect those deprived of their liberty, although the other victims of violence and armed conflict should not be forgotten.
ICRC had a broad experience in relation to detainees, and this was not limited to some specific places. In 2004, ICRC delegates visited more than 573,000 detainees, held in more than 2,000 places of detention in about 80 countries. Last year, the complementarity of international law and international human rights law had been discussed. Today, it was important to note that both types of law protected those detained in situations that were not of armed conflict or violence. It was those who were deprived of liberty who were often at the greatest risk of physical and mental abuse, and whose basic needs for food and adequate medical care were often at risk. With the right of States to detain, came the obligation to treat those detained with humanity and to respect their rights, and this was recognised by international law. These obligations included the prohibition of torture and other forms of ill-treatment, which was an absolute; adequate conditions of detainment, such as access to medical care, decent food and water; and the respect of procedural safeguards. The particular needs of specific groups such as women, juveniles and the elderly and the infirm should also be taken into account.
The situation of detainment appeared to have deteriorated over the last years, and States should devote themselves to remedying the situation. The international community should provide support for these States. By virtue of being human, all had human rights, and States, by virtue of international law, had to uphold these rights. The very principle of the rule of law was that no one was beyond the protection of the law. ICRC visited the detained in order to assess conditions and treatment and to make suggestions for improvement, and it maintained a constructive dialogue subsequently. ICRC would continue its work in the future in the context of these principles and rules.
DAO VIET TRUNG, Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs of Viet Nam, said for Viet Nam, human rights protection represented both a goal and a driving force in the cause of national construction. It was Viet Nam’s consistent position to take a people-centered approach in its economic and social policies in which human rights promotion and protection were considered an important factor to achieve sustainable development in the process of the country’s industrialization and modernization. "A strong country with wealthy people, and a just democratic and advanced society" was always the ultimate goal that Viet Nam strived for. In 2004, despite numerous challenges, the country continued to record important achievements. Peace and stability were firmly maintained, rapid economic growth achieved and people’s life substantially improved. Particularly, all economic, cultural, social, civil and political rights of every one continued to be guaranteed.
Since 2001, the Vietnamese economy had grown on average by 7.4 per cent and by 7.6 per cent in 2004. The National Programme on Employment had made important progress. Between 2001 and 2004, more than 5.87 million jobs were generated, of which 1.55 million jobs were created in 2004 alone. Those economic achievements demonstrated the country’s resolve to protect human rights, especially in the economic field. Viet Nam had also gained remarkable achievements in reducing poverty and raising the quality of the people’s life. According to the United Nations, Viet Nam was taking the lead in poverty reduction. The poverty rate had fallen from 58 per cent in 1992-1993 to 8.3 in 2004. Through its tireless efforts, Viet Nam had achieved the Millennium Development Goal on poverty reduction, well ahead of the 2015 target. That was indeed a spectacular progress on human rights in such a developing country as Viet Nam.
The civil and political rights of the people were also strictly respected and protected. The State created all the necessary conditions for its citizens to participate in the state and social management, which were considered one of the most important rights of citizens. Viet Nam was proud of the tremendous achievements recorded in 2004 in promoting the fundamental rights of its people.
FELIPE PEREZ ROQUE, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba, said that the Commission on Human Rights had lost its legitimacy. It was not credible; it allowed impunity to the powerful; it was characterized by lies, double standards, and empty speeches from those who enjoyed and squandered their wealth while millions of human beings endured violations of their rights to life, peace, development, food, education, and employment. The United States and its allies treated the Commission as their private property, turning it into an inquisition, which condemned the countries of the South -- particularly those opposing their neo-colonial agenda. In the past two years, the Commission had seen two significant events that might change the nature of its debate: the European Union’s refusal to co-sponsor or vote in favour of a draft resolution proposing to investigate the systematic violation of human rights at the United States naval base in Guantanamo Bay; and the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change’s conclusion that the Commission would not be credible if it maintained double standards in addressing human rights concerns.
Enjoyment of human rights depended on the country in which an individual lived, the Cuban Minister stated, as well as his social class. Even in rich countries, the unemployed, immigrants and the poor did not enjoy the rights reserved for the rich, and the situation was worse in underdeveloped countries. The more than 130 countries of the Third World remained unable to exercise their right to development due to the imposed economic system. They had no access to markets or new technologies; they remained handcuffed to debt burdens that had already been paid off. Led to believe that their poverty was the result of their own mistakes, they saw 11 million children under the age of five years die every year, and were kept in ignorance to keep them docile. The Cuban people held that there could be no democracy without social justice, no possibility of freedom without the right to education and culture, no enjoyment of human rights without equality and equity. Cubans had learned these facts long ago, and had sought to build a different country, which had incurred the United States’ attempts to condemn them.
All present knew there was no reason to present a resolution against Cuba at the Commission on Human Rights. Nothing would move Cuba away from its course to build an even more just, democratic, free and cultivated society -- a more socialist society. The Cuban people remained entitled to defend themselves from aggression. The establishment of organizations and mercenary parties financed by and at the service of the United States Government would not be allowed. Newspapers and television stations funded by the United States would not be allowed to uphold the policy of blockade and lies. Cuba would not comply with the Representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, nor with the resolution backing her. Cuba would not give up its fight, make concessions or betray its ideals. Moreover, the Cuban delegation would hereby cease to insist on transforming the Commission, and focus on changing the world. A Commission without selectivity, politicization, double standards, blackmail and hypocrisy would only be possible in a different world, and Cuba felt that was a cause worth fighting for.
ITSUNORI ONODERA, Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Japan, said there was a widely shared feeling among Member States on the need to reform the work of the Commission in the field of human rights. This year presented a special occasion to make progress as the reform of the United Nations was being addressed. Japan believed that any reform should have as its objective the enhancement of the ability of the Commission to promote and protect human rights effectively in every part of the world. Too much time should not be spent on unfruitful negotiations over the choice of language which had little impact on actual human rights situations. Also, unnecessary duplication should be avoided. Japan would further develop its concrete position based on this principle and stood ready to actively participate in the discussions.
Japan firmly believed that human rights were universal. The notions of good governance, non-discrimination, the rule of law and democracy were universally shared. The Commission on Human Rights had been instrumental in bringing this awareness to all. Yet despite this universal awareness and the efforts of the international community and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, grave human rights violations still occurred throughout the world. Japan fully recognised the importance of an appropriate understanding of each country’s history, culture, religion and tradition when the international community sought real progress. However, in cases where a Government ignored the good will of the international community and did not make the slightest effort towards improvement, none should sit idly by.
In the twenty-first century, there were growing threats which violated or affected people’s full enjoyment of human rights, such as the internationalisation of internal conflicts, terrorism, HIV/AIDS or other infectious diseases or natural disasters. However, they were not sufficiently addressed through the traditional framework of governance. In this context, Japan attached importance to the protection and empowerment of each and every individual, in other words, the promotion of human security, a concept which embraced all aspects of threats to human lives. Human rights education, in which everyone learnt tolerance and respect for others was of great importance. The promotion and protection of human rights remained a constant challenge, one that required untiring vigilance and ceaseless efforts. First and foremost what was required was unity and cooperation in order to make the world a better one through concerted endeavours for the children and the future.
HANS WINKLER, Deputy Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Austria, said his country attached great importance to the fight against trafficking in persons and was pursuing a holistic approach based on prevention, protection and prosecution. To that end, Austria had established a Task Force on Trafficking in Persons last year. Prevention initiatives included both the supply and the demand side. The Government also funded a specialized victims' protection centre, which offered secure shelter, psychological, social and legal assistance and other support to victims of trafficking. Austria was actively engaged in regional cooperation, in particular with the countries of South Eastern Europe, including within the framework of the Stability Pact, in the areas of prevention, training, law-enforcement, victim protection and reintegration. Based on Austria’s experiences, trafficking in human beings should not be treated exclusively as a "law and order" issue. Instead, a victim-centred approach was most effective in curbing that serious crime and horrendous human rights violation.
Education was the best way to ensure the empowerment of women and the creation of opportunities. Women continued to face discrimination and denial of their rights. During the past two decades, there had been a tremendous increase in the enrolment of girls in schools. Still 130 million children worldwide were not in school. Two out of three of them were girls. A lot still needed to be done to reach the Millennium Development Goals of universal primary education and gender equality. There was no tool more effective for development and poverty reduction than the empowerment of women. Austria’s development cooperation therefore focused on the promotion of education, health standards and economic independence of women.
Austria welcomed the fact that the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change recognized the protection of human rights as one of the central missions of the United Nations. Together with partners in the European Union, Austria had always advocated such emphasis on human rights as well as the focus on the concepts of prevention and of responsibility to protect. Austria strongly supported the ongoing reform process and had recently submitted a non-paper on "Recommendations on the Strengthening of the Rule of Law" to the Secretary-General in New York.
ALHAJI ABUBAKAR TANKO, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Nigeria, said that the international dialogue on promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights -- including the right to development -- must be made more practical and must be expressed through the political and economic empowerment of individuals and societies. Practical solutions to the perennial issues of poverty, underdevelopment, debt, economic disparities, social exclusion, instability and insecurity must be sought, and the Commission on Human Rights must adopt the measures necessary to tackle them. For its part, Nigeria had launched a new development agenda, known as the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, the aim of which was to improve living standards through poverty reduction, expansion of agriculture and industry, privatization programmes, and the implementation of government programmes based on the principles of transparency, accountability, fiscal discipline, due process and the fight against corruption and money laundering.
Creating the right environment for full enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms required the establishment of a durable democracy and the effective operation of the rule of law, Mr. Tanko noted. The Government had taken steps necessary to consolidate the nascent democracy, while ensuring extensive political reform. Reaffirming commitment to good governance, including through the promotion of the rule of law, freedom of opinion and expression, independence of the judiciary, and transparency of the political process, he noted that the National Political Reform Conference, which allowed Nigerians to discuss all issues of concern, had been established as a demonstration of the commitment to consult the people on national affairs. He also called for a radical review of debt reduction and debt cancellation policies for Highly Indebted Poor Countries, as well as for middle-income indebted countries, which would allow them to free resources to strengthen the protection and promotion of human rights.
On reform of the human rights mechanisms of the United Nations, Mr. Tanko said there was a need to strengthen the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to enable it to implement the resolutions and decisions of the Commission on Human Rights. Treaty monitoring bodies must also receive additional resources, as should the Commission’s special procedures and working groups. Prevention mechanisms must be developed, and the Commission’s mechanism for advisory services and technical assistance to States should be built up. Overall, the main concern must be to end politicization, selectivity and discriminatory treatment on issues of human rights. Membership on the Commission should not be universalized; the General Assembly’s Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) remained adequately positioned to respond to the concerns of non-members, and there was no need to duplicate its work.
BILL RAMMELL, Minister for International Human Rights of the United Kingdom, said this was a fitting time to stand back and remember why the Commission was meeting again this year. In one sense, it went without saying: the Commission was there to promote and protect the human rights of the people around the world. But in another sense, it seemed all too easy to lose sight of this point. Too often the Commission opened itself to charges of politicisation and discord. Too often, regrettably, members of the Commission had seemed more focussed on averting action than on fulfilling its mandate to promote and protect human rights. The report by the High-Level Panel had reflected the vital position which human rights held in the work of the international community: not simply in terms of upholding international standards for their own sake, but also because of the importance of human rights to so many of the other goals: sustainable development, economic prosperity, security and peace.
The job of the Commission was to ensure that the voiceless, those who were hungry, weak or oppressed, were given a voice. The Commission should be a forum for cooperation, promoting and developing human rights standards, and providing, where needed, assistance to individual countries which requested it. What was needed was to focus energy on making the existing legal instruments work: to implement their standards and achieve their aspirations. This meant addressing those situations where people were suffering under regimes which had little respect for their rights, and were making no effort to improve. If cooperation was withheld, and the Commission failed to address these situations, it would end up focusing only on those countries which were working to improve their records, while ignoring those which were making no such efforts, and were continuing seriously and systematically to violate the rights of their citizens.
The United Kingdom itself did not pretend to be perfect - neither it, nor any other country could ever be complacent about its human rights record. But respect for human rights was not about pretending to be perfect. It was about taking scrutiny seriously, about being transparent about strengths and weaknesses, and doing the best to remedy them. It was about respecting the rule of law. A good example of this was the issue of torture and the independent monitoring of detention facilities by national and international bodies. The rule of law was also vital to creating an environment conducive to sustainable development, which in turn helped States progressively to advance the economic, social and cultural rights of their people.
FRANCISCO SANTOS CALDERON, Vice-President of Colombia, said the Government of Colombia had been able to reduce the rate of violence in the country since it came to power, thanks to the policies it had adopted to ensure the democratic process. Between 2003 and 2004, the rate of homicide had been reduced by 15 per cent. The number of massacres had also been reduced by 52 per cent. The rate of victims of kidnapping and forced displacement had also been brought down. The positive achievements were made following the strengthening of the presence of the law enforcement forces and civilian authorities over the territory. In addition, the Government had taken measures to strengthen State institutions aimed at promoting and protecting human rights. It had also reduced the number of victims relating to mass killings and other crimes. Progress had also been achieved in strengthening impunity and making judicial proceedings more efficient.
A number of people had benefited from State protection, and trade union leaders also received protection. The number of killings of trade union activities had been reduced by half. Constant progress had also been achieved in employment and people were able to find jobs in all fields. The barbaric nature of the guerrilla fighters had been characterized by their atrocious acts in killing civilian populations, including committing acts of terrorism, kidnappings and other illegal acts.
In cooperation with the international community and the United Nations, Colombia would continue its efforts to strengthen its security and democratic institutions. The Government of Colombia was working in close collaboration with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Colombia. It was also implementing the recommendations of the Office concerning the reform of institutions relating to human rights.
Right of Reply
PANKAJ SARAN (India), speaking in a right of reply, said that yesterday the Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) had made an unacceptable reference to an integral part of India while referring to relations between India and Pakistan. The OIC did not have any locus standi in addressing itself to this issue. All the legal rights of the people of Jammu and Kashmir were fully protected and guaranteed by the Constitution of India, and had been and continued to be enjoyed by them in full measure. The OIC’s call for the peace process to become genuine was considered gratuitous, and was a misguided comment on the nature and scope of the current dialogue between India and Pakistan. The OIC was called upon to refrain from indulging in rhetorical statements which in no way advanced the interests of those whom the OIC misguidedly claimed to represent.
CHAIYONG SATJIPANON (Thailand), speaking in exercise of the right of reply in response to the statement made yesterday by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said the Government of Thailand remained firmly committed to the principle of non-discrimination, which constituted the central tenet of the Constitution. All Thai citizens were entitled to the same basic rights and fundamental freedoms without distinction, and the Government remained committed to upholding the spirit and letter of the law of the land. The Government also aimed to promote a harmonious and open society in which every citizen enjoyed full freedom to participate in religious, social, economic and political life. It had never failed to give its fullest support to all religious affairs, including Islamic affairs, and to ensure that Thai citizens of all faiths could pursue a way of life of their choice within a multi-cultural society.
Moreover, with regard to the present situation in the south, he wished to inform the Commission that the restoration of peace and harmony was a top national priority, which would be brought about through the collective effort of all sectors of society. Although only an observer, Thailand attached great importance to its relations with the OIC, and it had never failed to render its support and cooperation to the organization’s activities.
CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea), speaking in exercise of the right of reply in response to statements made by the United Kingdom and Japan, said that the United Kingdom’s statement represented an explicit expression of the country’s vested interest to name-and-shame for political reasons that had nothing to do with human rights. As for Japan, that country had lost the right to talk about others’ human rights records due to its failure to address the unprecedented and inhumane crimes it had committed in Asia and elsewhere. Moreover, in 2002, Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had published a joint document by which they resolved to solve the issue mutually. His country’s efforts had led to a complete resolution of the issue, yet Japan continued to mislead the international community by circulating fabricated information. Japan had committed crimes against humanity in Korea over a span of 40 years, kidnapping Koreans and imposing sexual slavery on Korean women. That history could never be compared with the negligible number of abducted Japanese. Japan remained the only country not to settle with its past; it was rich in terms of wealth, but poor in terms of morality. Japan should settle all its crimes against humanity before doing anything else.
CHITSAKA CHIPAZIWA (Zimbabwe), speaking in a right of reply in response to the statement of the United Kingdom, said it was to be expected that the Minister of the United Kingdom would be the first speaker to condemn Zimbabwe. His characterisation of the situation was as nauseating as it was inaccurate, as free elections had and would be held. It was outside meddling by rogue powers that posed the greatest danger to the home-grown democracy in Zimbabwe. The absence of violence in Zimbabwe appeared to upset the United Kingdom’s plans. There was rule of law, and none would be allowed to destabilise the country. All attempts by the United Kingdom to become the opposition party in Zimbabwe would come to naught. It was clear that Zimbabwe and the United Kingdom had a bilateral misunderstanding that had no place in the Commission, and this was why the Commission should continue to throw out any attempts at a resolution proposed by the United Kingdom. Zimbabwe was a beautiful bride that had thrown out the ugly bulldog forever.
SHOTARO OSHIMA (Japan), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, stressed that abduction remained a serious crime and a grave violation of human rights. It constituted a patently wrongful act, and this notion was widely shared in this room. Thus, it was not an issue only for the families concerned, or only for the Japanese. It was a critical issue with which the international community as a whole should be concerned. The leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had admitted and apologized for the abductions. As for all the allegations made by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the position of the Government of Japan on the past issues had been made clear and did not need to be restated here. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had claimed to resolve the issue of abductions, but had given no assurance of the safety of the abductees, except the five who were returned. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea should assure Japan of its intention to resolve the issue at once.
CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) reiterated the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's rejection of the traditional arguments of Japan. Japan had responded to the sincere efforts by hostility, and had even fabricated the results of a DNA test on the returned remains of a Japanese. The inconclusive results of this test only showed further the moral and legal obligations of Japan to address all the past crimes against humanity committed by them, without which it could not be entrusted with responsible membership of the Security Council.
SHA ZUKANG (China), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the Japanese statement had said that what happened years ago had nothing to do with today. Yet, this was the 60th anniversary of the victory against fascism, and that was extremely important for the job at hand today. As a neighbour of Japan, China had enjoyed friendly relations with Japan for more than 2000 years, but it had also experienced aggression and unprecedented misery during the years of World War II. More than 10 million Chinese had been brutally slaughtered during that war. This was history, and it would never be forgotten. Just as 11 September was part of history, and Pearl Harbour, none should forget the Japanese acts. These historical lessons could serve as a guide for the future, while forgetting history meant betrayal. Japan should face its wartime past. It should do as the Germans had done. The greatness of a great nation lay in the fact of its courage to face its own history, and to look forward to the future.
SHOTARO OSHIMA (Japan), speaking in a second right of reply, said he wished to make two points. First, with regards to the point made by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the scientific research on the returned remains was not conclusive. The analysis had been done by the foremost scientific organisation of Japan. With regards to the issue of the past, Japan had made its position very clear many times, and there was no need to repeat this today.
* *** *
For use of the information media; not an official record
MORNING
16 March 2005
Officials from Venezuela, Botswana, Guatemala,
Honduras, International Committee of Red Cross,
Viet Nam, Cuba, Japan, Austria, Nigeria, United Kingdom
and Colombia Speak
The Commission on Human Rights this morning continued its high-level segment and heard a series of statements from dignitaries representing Venezuela, Botswana, Guatemala, Honduras, the International Committee of the Red Cross, Viet Nam, Cuba, Japan, Austria, Nigeria, the United Kingdom and Colombia.
Some speakers highlighted their respective countries’ achievements in the promotion and protection of human rights, while others raised issues concerning the reform of the Commission, discrimination against women and trafficking in human beings.
Mary Pili Hernandez, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Venezuela, stressed that respect for human rights constituted a vocation for Venezuela whose Constitution was one of the most progressive texts in the world. Among other initiatives in support of human rights, national programmes had been implemented to guarantee the human rights of all citizens, particularly those who had traditionally been excluded from society.
Phandu T. C. Skelemani, Minister for Presidential Affairs and Public Administration of Botswana, said as part of an effort to ensure that the Constitution of Botswana afforded all citizens equal protection of their human rights and fundamental freedoms, a Constitutional (Amendment) Bill was currently being processed through Parliament which was aimed at amending some specific sections of the Constitution which were not truly neutral.
Marta Altolaguirre, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Guatemala said last December, the United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala - MINUGUA - had terminated its mission after ten years of presence in the country during which it had monitored the implementation of the peace agreement. During that decade, progress had been recorded in strengthening and consolidating a democratic society, particularly in the field of respect for human rights.
Jorge Hernandez Alcerro, Minister of Governance and Justice of Honduras, said everyone knew that poverty negatively affected the full enjoyment of human rights, particularly economic and social rights. As poverty was one of the greatest challenges facing Honduras, the Government had been prompted to implement a national poverty reduction strategy, which aimed to reorient and increase social spending, and to redesign social policy.
Jakob Kellenberger, President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said utmost vigilance and care remained important in responding to the needs of those affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. In 2004, ICRC delegates visited more than 573,000 detainees, held in more than 2,000 places of detention in about 80 countries.
Dao Viet Trung, Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs of Viet Nam, said human rights protection represented both a goal and a driving force in the cause of national construction, and it was Viet Nam’s consistent position to take a people-centered approach in its economic and social policies in which human rights promotion and protection were considered an important factor to achieve sustainable development in the process of the country’s industrialization and modernization.
Felipe Perez Roque, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba, said that the Commission on Human Rights had lost its legitimacy. It was not credible. The United States and its allies treated the Commission as their private property, turning it into an inquisition which condemned the countries of the South -- particularly those opposing their neocolonial agenda.
Itsunori Onodera, Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Japan, said Japan firmly believed that human rights were universal, and the notions of good governance, non-discrimination, the rule of law and democracy were universally shared. The Commission on Human Rights had been instrumental in bringing this awareness to all. Yet despite this universal awareness and the efforts of the international community and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, grave human rights violations still occurred throughout the world.
Hans Winkler, Deputy Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Austria, said his country attached great importance to the fight against trafficking in persons and was pursuing a holistic approach based on prevention, protection and prosecution. With regard to women, education was the best way to ensure their empowerment and the creation of opportunities.
Alhaji Abubakar Tanko, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Nigeria, said that the international dialogue on the promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights -- including the right to development – should be made more practical and should be expressed through the political and economic empowerment of individuals and societies.
Bill Rammell, Minister for International Human Rights of the United Kingdom, said the job of the Commission was to ensure that the voiceless, those who were hungry, weak or oppressed, were given a voice. The Commission should be a forum for cooperation, promoting and developing human rights standards, and providing, where needed, assistance to individual countries that requested it.
And Francisco Santos Calderon, Vice-President of Colombia, said the Government of Colombia had been able to reduce the rate of violence in the country since it came to power, thanks to the policies it had adopted to ensure the democratic process. Between 2003 and 2004, the rate of homicide had been reduced by 15 per cent. The number of massacres had also been reduced by 52 per cent. The rate of victims of kidnapping and forced displacement had also been brought down. The positive achievements were made following the strengthening of the presence of the law enforcement forces and civilian authorities over the territory.
At the end of the meeting, India, Thailand, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Zimbabwe, Japan and China exercised their right of reply.
When the Commission meets at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it is scheduled to hear addresses by the Minister for Human Rights of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Under-Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Lithuania, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs of Kenya, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan, the Director-General for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Council of Europe and Human Rights, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Romania, the Advisor (State Minister) for Foreign Affairs of Bangladesh, the Head of the Human Rights Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iraq, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Serbia and Montenegro, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria, and the Minister of Law, Justice and Human Rights of Pakistan.
Statements
MARY PILI HERNANDEZ, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Venezuela, stressed that respect for human rights constituted a vocation for Venezuela whose Constitution was one of the most progressive texts in the world. As it contained a special chapter devoted to human rights, the Government had necessarily undertaken to bring national legislation into conformity with that document. Among other initiatives in support of human rights, national programmes had been implemented to guarantee the human rights of all citizens, particularly those who had traditionally been excluded from society. These programmes were known as "missions", and aimed to improve the provision of health and education services, to reduce the price of food, and to enhance the participation of the indigenous population in economic and social life. As one could not speak of democracy without ensuring the active participation of all citizens, local planning councils had been established to enable individual townships to decide how to dispense their budgets. Overall, Venezuela had become a model of democracy for the international community.
Stating that the concept of representative democracy should remain part of the history of the twentieth century, Ms. Hernandez said the democracy of the twenty-first century should be participatory. Moreover, merely defending civil and political rights was not sufficient. Economic, social and cultural rights must also be promoted. To that end, the Government of Venezuela had worked at the regional level to support initiatives to promote these rights, and had supported the establishment of an international humanitarian fund, which aimed to find resources to ensure solidarity.
Turning to the issue of the reform of the United Nations, Ms. Hernandez said that the General Assembly must be confirmed as the Organization’s highest decision-making body, thereby reducing the excessive recourse to the Security Council. It was still necessary to expand membership of the Council, but that would still be insufficient to reflect the reality of the multi-polar world. The use of the veto should be eliminated, and the Security Council should cease to interfere on human rights matters. Those were directly the responsibility of the General Assembly. Furthermore, with regard to the fight against terrorism, Venezuela's Government reaffirmed its rejection of both terrorism and State terrorism that was perpetrated in the name of fighting terrorism.
PHANDU T. C. SKELEMANI, Minister for Presidential Affairs and Public Administration of Botswana, said the Government of Botswana attached great importance to the mandate of the Commission. To this end, Botswana was striving to meet its reporting obligations in respect of the various international human rights instruments to which it was a State Party. This came amidst constraints concerning human resources and institutional capacity. Botswana was committed to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and these rights were fully protected under the Constitution. Although Botswana had to date not produced a single refugee or asylum seeker, it continued to provide sanctuary to many refugees and asylum seekers from various African countries. Botswana pursued a policy which was aimed at facilitating the integration of refugees who wished to settle permanently in the country.
The full enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms required the active participation of both men and women as equal partners. To this end, measures had been taken in Botswana to amend those laws which discriminated against women. These developments fulfilled some of the key aspirations of the Beijing Conference. The implementation of the Declaration and Platform of Action of the Beijing Conference in Botswana had given birth to the National Gender Plan of Action. The main focus of this Plan was the education and health rights of the girl child as well as the active participation of women in all sectors of the economy and in decision-making positions.
As part of an effort to ensure that the Constitution afforded all citizens equal protection of their human rights and fundamental freedoms, a Constitutional (Amendment) Bill was currently being processed through Parliament, which was aimed at amending some specific sections of the Constitution which were not truly neutral. Botswana as an active player in the global village continued to play its part, whilst at the same time trying to maintain and protect its cultural values and norms. Botswana had faith in the viability of the Commission as an instrument for the protection of democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law, and therefore fully supported the Commission’s efforts to make this world a safer place for both present and future generations.
MARTA ALTOLAGUIRRE, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Guatemala, said last December, the United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala - MINUGUA - had terminated its mission after ten years of presence in the country during which it had monitored the implementation of the peace agreement. During that decade, progress had been recorded in strengthening and consolidating a democratic society, particularly in the field of respect for human rights. Taking the peace agreement as a basic agenda for public administration, a national commission for peace had been set up in which civil society was represented. A number of laws had also been adopted with the view to protecting and promoting human rights. The Government had also undertaken institutional reforms, including the reduction of the strength of the military. According to the peace agreement, the military had been reduced by 67 per cent and the military camps had been converted into educational and rehabilitation centres. The military was also modernized with the aim to serve in peacekeeping missions with the United Nations. The national police force had also been demilitarised and had been given a civilian character.
The bulk of the national budget had been allocated to social and educational developments. Additional measures had also been taken to strengthen the prosecutor’s office in matters of human rights. An independent commission had also been established to investigate complaints on human rights violations. The condition of women had been a matter of concern to the Government. In order to implement the Beijing Declaration, a series of measures had been taken to empower women and to provide them with employment and other social benefits. The equal opportunity of women had also been strengthened through the adoption of legal instruments. Further measures were also taken to protect women from any form of violence, including sexual violence.
The Government of Guatemala had declared 2005 the "National Year of Disappeared Persons" and had strengthened the administrative and legal provisions to protect victims of disappeared persons. The Government reiterated its invitation to all special rapports and representatives with regard to human rights to visit the country.
JORGE HERNANDEZ ALCERRO, Minister of Governance and Justice of Honduras, said everyone knew that poverty negatively affected the full enjoyment of human rights, particularly economic and social rights. As poverty was one of the greatest challenges facing Honduras, the Government had implemented a national poverty reduction strategy which aimed to reorient and increase social spending and to redesign social policy. While noting that the country had faced a violent wave of crime at the end of the last decade, the Honduran Minister summarized national efforts to combat that phenomenon in its various forms, including common crime, organized crime, and gangs linked to drug trafficking. Acts of true terrorism by gangs had obliged the Government to allocate major human resources to prevent their recurrence, and the country’s police, prosecutors and judges continued to work to deal with the problem, and to ensure security, within the framework of the Constitution and national legislation.
A significant reduction in levels of crime had been achieved, the Honduran Minister noted, and a national arms registration programme had been established, as had public policies to prevent children and adolescents from joining gangs. However, the Government remained concerned by the rate of violent death for children in the country’s cities. Thus, in 2002, a permanent commission for protection of the physical and moral integrity of children had been established, and a special investigation unit for deaths of minors had been created. Honduras remained firmly committed to combating and ending this serious problem.
The Government had also taken major steps to promote and protect human rights. A national council had been established which recommended policies, plans of action and specific measures to promote the exercise and dissemination of information on human rights. Moreover, within the context of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the President had publicly recognized the Government’s responsibility for the violation of human rights of individual citizens, and had reached agreement to compensate victims of human rights violations in the 1980s. Additionally, Honduras had made major progress at the national, legislative and institutional levels to prevent and punish all forms of violence against women, including through the promulgation of a law against domestic violence. Other national priorities included eradication of the scourge of human trafficking, and ensuring migrants’ rights.
JAKOB KELLENBERGER, President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said utmost vigilance and care remained important in responding to the needs of those affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. Protection of such persons in such situations lay at the heart of the work of ICRC. In particular, this statement would focus on ICRC's duty to protect those deprived of their liberty, although the other victims of violence and armed conflict should not be forgotten.
ICRC had a broad experience in relation to detainees, and this was not limited to some specific places. In 2004, ICRC delegates visited more than 573,000 detainees, held in more than 2,000 places of detention in about 80 countries. Last year, the complementarity of international law and international human rights law had been discussed. Today, it was important to note that both types of law protected those detained in situations that were not of armed conflict or violence. It was those who were deprived of liberty who were often at the greatest risk of physical and mental abuse, and whose basic needs for food and adequate medical care were often at risk. With the right of States to detain, came the obligation to treat those detained with humanity and to respect their rights, and this was recognised by international law. These obligations included the prohibition of torture and other forms of ill-treatment, which was an absolute; adequate conditions of detainment, such as access to medical care, decent food and water; and the respect of procedural safeguards. The particular needs of specific groups such as women, juveniles and the elderly and the infirm should also be taken into account.
The situation of detainment appeared to have deteriorated over the last years, and States should devote themselves to remedying the situation. The international community should provide support for these States. By virtue of being human, all had human rights, and States, by virtue of international law, had to uphold these rights. The very principle of the rule of law was that no one was beyond the protection of the law. ICRC visited the detained in order to assess conditions and treatment and to make suggestions for improvement, and it maintained a constructive dialogue subsequently. ICRC would continue its work in the future in the context of these principles and rules.
DAO VIET TRUNG, Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs of Viet Nam, said for Viet Nam, human rights protection represented both a goal and a driving force in the cause of national construction. It was Viet Nam’s consistent position to take a people-centered approach in its economic and social policies in which human rights promotion and protection were considered an important factor to achieve sustainable development in the process of the country’s industrialization and modernization. "A strong country with wealthy people, and a just democratic and advanced society" was always the ultimate goal that Viet Nam strived for. In 2004, despite numerous challenges, the country continued to record important achievements. Peace and stability were firmly maintained, rapid economic growth achieved and people’s life substantially improved. Particularly, all economic, cultural, social, civil and political rights of every one continued to be guaranteed.
Since 2001, the Vietnamese economy had grown on average by 7.4 per cent and by 7.6 per cent in 2004. The National Programme on Employment had made important progress. Between 2001 and 2004, more than 5.87 million jobs were generated, of which 1.55 million jobs were created in 2004 alone. Those economic achievements demonstrated the country’s resolve to protect human rights, especially in the economic field. Viet Nam had also gained remarkable achievements in reducing poverty and raising the quality of the people’s life. According to the United Nations, Viet Nam was taking the lead in poverty reduction. The poverty rate had fallen from 58 per cent in 1992-1993 to 8.3 in 2004. Through its tireless efforts, Viet Nam had achieved the Millennium Development Goal on poverty reduction, well ahead of the 2015 target. That was indeed a spectacular progress on human rights in such a developing country as Viet Nam.
The civil and political rights of the people were also strictly respected and protected. The State created all the necessary conditions for its citizens to participate in the state and social management, which were considered one of the most important rights of citizens. Viet Nam was proud of the tremendous achievements recorded in 2004 in promoting the fundamental rights of its people.
FELIPE PEREZ ROQUE, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba, said that the Commission on Human Rights had lost its legitimacy. It was not credible; it allowed impunity to the powerful; it was characterized by lies, double standards, and empty speeches from those who enjoyed and squandered their wealth while millions of human beings endured violations of their rights to life, peace, development, food, education, and employment. The United States and its allies treated the Commission as their private property, turning it into an inquisition, which condemned the countries of the South -- particularly those opposing their neo-colonial agenda. In the past two years, the Commission had seen two significant events that might change the nature of its debate: the European Union’s refusal to co-sponsor or vote in favour of a draft resolution proposing to investigate the systematic violation of human rights at the United States naval base in Guantanamo Bay; and the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change’s conclusion that the Commission would not be credible if it maintained double standards in addressing human rights concerns.
Enjoyment of human rights depended on the country in which an individual lived, the Cuban Minister stated, as well as his social class. Even in rich countries, the unemployed, immigrants and the poor did not enjoy the rights reserved for the rich, and the situation was worse in underdeveloped countries. The more than 130 countries of the Third World remained unable to exercise their right to development due to the imposed economic system. They had no access to markets or new technologies; they remained handcuffed to debt burdens that had already been paid off. Led to believe that their poverty was the result of their own mistakes, they saw 11 million children under the age of five years die every year, and were kept in ignorance to keep them docile. The Cuban people held that there could be no democracy without social justice, no possibility of freedom without the right to education and culture, no enjoyment of human rights without equality and equity. Cubans had learned these facts long ago, and had sought to build a different country, which had incurred the United States’ attempts to condemn them.
All present knew there was no reason to present a resolution against Cuba at the Commission on Human Rights. Nothing would move Cuba away from its course to build an even more just, democratic, free and cultivated society -- a more socialist society. The Cuban people remained entitled to defend themselves from aggression. The establishment of organizations and mercenary parties financed by and at the service of the United States Government would not be allowed. Newspapers and television stations funded by the United States would not be allowed to uphold the policy of blockade and lies. Cuba would not comply with the Representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, nor with the resolution backing her. Cuba would not give up its fight, make concessions or betray its ideals. Moreover, the Cuban delegation would hereby cease to insist on transforming the Commission, and focus on changing the world. A Commission without selectivity, politicization, double standards, blackmail and hypocrisy would only be possible in a different world, and Cuba felt that was a cause worth fighting for.
ITSUNORI ONODERA, Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Japan, said there was a widely shared feeling among Member States on the need to reform the work of the Commission in the field of human rights. This year presented a special occasion to make progress as the reform of the United Nations was being addressed. Japan believed that any reform should have as its objective the enhancement of the ability of the Commission to promote and protect human rights effectively in every part of the world. Too much time should not be spent on unfruitful negotiations over the choice of language which had little impact on actual human rights situations. Also, unnecessary duplication should be avoided. Japan would further develop its concrete position based on this principle and stood ready to actively participate in the discussions.
Japan firmly believed that human rights were universal. The notions of good governance, non-discrimination, the rule of law and democracy were universally shared. The Commission on Human Rights had been instrumental in bringing this awareness to all. Yet despite this universal awareness and the efforts of the international community and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, grave human rights violations still occurred throughout the world. Japan fully recognised the importance of an appropriate understanding of each country’s history, culture, religion and tradition when the international community sought real progress. However, in cases where a Government ignored the good will of the international community and did not make the slightest effort towards improvement, none should sit idly by.
In the twenty-first century, there were growing threats which violated or affected people’s full enjoyment of human rights, such as the internationalisation of internal conflicts, terrorism, HIV/AIDS or other infectious diseases or natural disasters. However, they were not sufficiently addressed through the traditional framework of governance. In this context, Japan attached importance to the protection and empowerment of each and every individual, in other words, the promotion of human security, a concept which embraced all aspects of threats to human lives. Human rights education, in which everyone learnt tolerance and respect for others was of great importance. The promotion and protection of human rights remained a constant challenge, one that required untiring vigilance and ceaseless efforts. First and foremost what was required was unity and cooperation in order to make the world a better one through concerted endeavours for the children and the future.
HANS WINKLER, Deputy Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Austria, said his country attached great importance to the fight against trafficking in persons and was pursuing a holistic approach based on prevention, protection and prosecution. To that end, Austria had established a Task Force on Trafficking in Persons last year. Prevention initiatives included both the supply and the demand side. The Government also funded a specialized victims' protection centre, which offered secure shelter, psychological, social and legal assistance and other support to victims of trafficking. Austria was actively engaged in regional cooperation, in particular with the countries of South Eastern Europe, including within the framework of the Stability Pact, in the areas of prevention, training, law-enforcement, victim protection and reintegration. Based on Austria’s experiences, trafficking in human beings should not be treated exclusively as a "law and order" issue. Instead, a victim-centred approach was most effective in curbing that serious crime and horrendous human rights violation.
Education was the best way to ensure the empowerment of women and the creation of opportunities. Women continued to face discrimination and denial of their rights. During the past two decades, there had been a tremendous increase in the enrolment of girls in schools. Still 130 million children worldwide were not in school. Two out of three of them were girls. A lot still needed to be done to reach the Millennium Development Goals of universal primary education and gender equality. There was no tool more effective for development and poverty reduction than the empowerment of women. Austria’s development cooperation therefore focused on the promotion of education, health standards and economic independence of women.
Austria welcomed the fact that the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change recognized the protection of human rights as one of the central missions of the United Nations. Together with partners in the European Union, Austria had always advocated such emphasis on human rights as well as the focus on the concepts of prevention and of responsibility to protect. Austria strongly supported the ongoing reform process and had recently submitted a non-paper on "Recommendations on the Strengthening of the Rule of Law" to the Secretary-General in New York.
ALHAJI ABUBAKAR TANKO, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Nigeria, said that the international dialogue on promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights -- including the right to development -- must be made more practical and must be expressed through the political and economic empowerment of individuals and societies. Practical solutions to the perennial issues of poverty, underdevelopment, debt, economic disparities, social exclusion, instability and insecurity must be sought, and the Commission on Human Rights must adopt the measures necessary to tackle them. For its part, Nigeria had launched a new development agenda, known as the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, the aim of which was to improve living standards through poverty reduction, expansion of agriculture and industry, privatization programmes, and the implementation of government programmes based on the principles of transparency, accountability, fiscal discipline, due process and the fight against corruption and money laundering.
Creating the right environment for full enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms required the establishment of a durable democracy and the effective operation of the rule of law, Mr. Tanko noted. The Government had taken steps necessary to consolidate the nascent democracy, while ensuring extensive political reform. Reaffirming commitment to good governance, including through the promotion of the rule of law, freedom of opinion and expression, independence of the judiciary, and transparency of the political process, he noted that the National Political Reform Conference, which allowed Nigerians to discuss all issues of concern, had been established as a demonstration of the commitment to consult the people on national affairs. He also called for a radical review of debt reduction and debt cancellation policies for Highly Indebted Poor Countries, as well as for middle-income indebted countries, which would allow them to free resources to strengthen the protection and promotion of human rights.
On reform of the human rights mechanisms of the United Nations, Mr. Tanko said there was a need to strengthen the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to enable it to implement the resolutions and decisions of the Commission on Human Rights. Treaty monitoring bodies must also receive additional resources, as should the Commission’s special procedures and working groups. Prevention mechanisms must be developed, and the Commission’s mechanism for advisory services and technical assistance to States should be built up. Overall, the main concern must be to end politicization, selectivity and discriminatory treatment on issues of human rights. Membership on the Commission should not be universalized; the General Assembly’s Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) remained adequately positioned to respond to the concerns of non-members, and there was no need to duplicate its work.
BILL RAMMELL, Minister for International Human Rights of the United Kingdom, said this was a fitting time to stand back and remember why the Commission was meeting again this year. In one sense, it went without saying: the Commission was there to promote and protect the human rights of the people around the world. But in another sense, it seemed all too easy to lose sight of this point. Too often the Commission opened itself to charges of politicisation and discord. Too often, regrettably, members of the Commission had seemed more focussed on averting action than on fulfilling its mandate to promote and protect human rights. The report by the High-Level Panel had reflected the vital position which human rights held in the work of the international community: not simply in terms of upholding international standards for their own sake, but also because of the importance of human rights to so many of the other goals: sustainable development, economic prosperity, security and peace.
The job of the Commission was to ensure that the voiceless, those who were hungry, weak or oppressed, were given a voice. The Commission should be a forum for cooperation, promoting and developing human rights standards, and providing, where needed, assistance to individual countries which requested it. What was needed was to focus energy on making the existing legal instruments work: to implement their standards and achieve their aspirations. This meant addressing those situations where people were suffering under regimes which had little respect for their rights, and were making no effort to improve. If cooperation was withheld, and the Commission failed to address these situations, it would end up focusing only on those countries which were working to improve their records, while ignoring those which were making no such efforts, and were continuing seriously and systematically to violate the rights of their citizens.
The United Kingdom itself did not pretend to be perfect - neither it, nor any other country could ever be complacent about its human rights record. But respect for human rights was not about pretending to be perfect. It was about taking scrutiny seriously, about being transparent about strengths and weaknesses, and doing the best to remedy them. It was about respecting the rule of law. A good example of this was the issue of torture and the independent monitoring of detention facilities by national and international bodies. The rule of law was also vital to creating an environment conducive to sustainable development, which in turn helped States progressively to advance the economic, social and cultural rights of their people.
FRANCISCO SANTOS CALDERON, Vice-President of Colombia, said the Government of Colombia had been able to reduce the rate of violence in the country since it came to power, thanks to the policies it had adopted to ensure the democratic process. Between 2003 and 2004, the rate of homicide had been reduced by 15 per cent. The number of massacres had also been reduced by 52 per cent. The rate of victims of kidnapping and forced displacement had also been brought down. The positive achievements were made following the strengthening of the presence of the law enforcement forces and civilian authorities over the territory. In addition, the Government had taken measures to strengthen State institutions aimed at promoting and protecting human rights. It had also reduced the number of victims relating to mass killings and other crimes. Progress had also been achieved in strengthening impunity and making judicial proceedings more efficient.
A number of people had benefited from State protection, and trade union leaders also received protection. The number of killings of trade union activities had been reduced by half. Constant progress had also been achieved in employment and people were able to find jobs in all fields. The barbaric nature of the guerrilla fighters had been characterized by their atrocious acts in killing civilian populations, including committing acts of terrorism, kidnappings and other illegal acts.
In cooperation with the international community and the United Nations, Colombia would continue its efforts to strengthen its security and democratic institutions. The Government of Colombia was working in close collaboration with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Colombia. It was also implementing the recommendations of the Office concerning the reform of institutions relating to human rights.
Right of Reply
PANKAJ SARAN (India), speaking in a right of reply, said that yesterday the Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) had made an unacceptable reference to an integral part of India while referring to relations between India and Pakistan. The OIC did not have any locus standi in addressing itself to this issue. All the legal rights of the people of Jammu and Kashmir were fully protected and guaranteed by the Constitution of India, and had been and continued to be enjoyed by them in full measure. The OIC’s call for the peace process to become genuine was considered gratuitous, and was a misguided comment on the nature and scope of the current dialogue between India and Pakistan. The OIC was called upon to refrain from indulging in rhetorical statements which in no way advanced the interests of those whom the OIC misguidedly claimed to represent.
CHAIYONG SATJIPANON (Thailand), speaking in exercise of the right of reply in response to the statement made yesterday by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said the Government of Thailand remained firmly committed to the principle of non-discrimination, which constituted the central tenet of the Constitution. All Thai citizens were entitled to the same basic rights and fundamental freedoms without distinction, and the Government remained committed to upholding the spirit and letter of the law of the land. The Government also aimed to promote a harmonious and open society in which every citizen enjoyed full freedom to participate in religious, social, economic and political life. It had never failed to give its fullest support to all religious affairs, including Islamic affairs, and to ensure that Thai citizens of all faiths could pursue a way of life of their choice within a multi-cultural society.
Moreover, with regard to the present situation in the south, he wished to inform the Commission that the restoration of peace and harmony was a top national priority, which would be brought about through the collective effort of all sectors of society. Although only an observer, Thailand attached great importance to its relations with the OIC, and it had never failed to render its support and cooperation to the organization’s activities.
CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea), speaking in exercise of the right of reply in response to statements made by the United Kingdom and Japan, said that the United Kingdom’s statement represented an explicit expression of the country’s vested interest to name-and-shame for political reasons that had nothing to do with human rights. As for Japan, that country had lost the right to talk about others’ human rights records due to its failure to address the unprecedented and inhumane crimes it had committed in Asia and elsewhere. Moreover, in 2002, Japan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had published a joint document by which they resolved to solve the issue mutually. His country’s efforts had led to a complete resolution of the issue, yet Japan continued to mislead the international community by circulating fabricated information. Japan had committed crimes against humanity in Korea over a span of 40 years, kidnapping Koreans and imposing sexual slavery on Korean women. That history could never be compared with the negligible number of abducted Japanese. Japan remained the only country not to settle with its past; it was rich in terms of wealth, but poor in terms of morality. Japan should settle all its crimes against humanity before doing anything else.
CHITSAKA CHIPAZIWA (Zimbabwe), speaking in a right of reply in response to the statement of the United Kingdom, said it was to be expected that the Minister of the United Kingdom would be the first speaker to condemn Zimbabwe. His characterisation of the situation was as nauseating as it was inaccurate, as free elections had and would be held. It was outside meddling by rogue powers that posed the greatest danger to the home-grown democracy in Zimbabwe. The absence of violence in Zimbabwe appeared to upset the United Kingdom’s plans. There was rule of law, and none would be allowed to destabilise the country. All attempts by the United Kingdom to become the opposition party in Zimbabwe would come to naught. It was clear that Zimbabwe and the United Kingdom had a bilateral misunderstanding that had no place in the Commission, and this was why the Commission should continue to throw out any attempts at a resolution proposed by the United Kingdom. Zimbabwe was a beautiful bride that had thrown out the ugly bulldog forever.
SHOTARO OSHIMA (Japan), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, stressed that abduction remained a serious crime and a grave violation of human rights. It constituted a patently wrongful act, and this notion was widely shared in this room. Thus, it was not an issue only for the families concerned, or only for the Japanese. It was a critical issue with which the international community as a whole should be concerned. The leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had admitted and apologized for the abductions. As for all the allegations made by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the position of the Government of Japan on the past issues had been made clear and did not need to be restated here. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had claimed to resolve the issue of abductions, but had given no assurance of the safety of the abductees, except the five who were returned. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea should assure Japan of its intention to resolve the issue at once.
CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) reiterated the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's rejection of the traditional arguments of Japan. Japan had responded to the sincere efforts by hostility, and had even fabricated the results of a DNA test on the returned remains of a Japanese. The inconclusive results of this test only showed further the moral and legal obligations of Japan to address all the past crimes against humanity committed by them, without which it could not be entrusted with responsible membership of the Security Council.
SHA ZUKANG (China), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the Japanese statement had said that what happened years ago had nothing to do with today. Yet, this was the 60th anniversary of the victory against fascism, and that was extremely important for the job at hand today. As a neighbour of Japan, China had enjoyed friendly relations with Japan for more than 2000 years, but it had also experienced aggression and unprecedented misery during the years of World War II. More than 10 million Chinese had been brutally slaughtered during that war. This was history, and it would never be forgotten. Just as 11 September was part of history, and Pearl Harbour, none should forget the Japanese acts. These historical lessons could serve as a guide for the future, while forgetting history meant betrayal. Japan should face its wartime past. It should do as the Germans had done. The greatness of a great nation lay in the fact of its courage to face its own history, and to look forward to the future.
SHOTARO OSHIMA (Japan), speaking in a second right of reply, said he wished to make two points. First, with regards to the point made by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the scientific research on the returned remains was not conclusive. The analysis had been done by the foremost scientific organisation of Japan. With regards to the issue of the past, Japan had made its position very clear many times, and there was no need to repeat this today.
* *** *
For use of the information media; not an official record
VIEW THIS PAGE IN: