COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS OPENS FIFTY-NINTH SESSION

Commission on Human Rights
59th session
17 March 2003
Morning



High Commissioner for Human Rights:
One Cannot Compromise Hard-Won Human Rights
to Give States a Free Hand in Fighting Terrorism



The Commission on Human Rights opened its fifty-ninth session this morning and heard Sergio Vieira de Mello, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, say that the Commission was meeting at a time of unusual convulsion in world affairs. He was not only speaking of those crises dominating the headlines - he was also speaking about the HIV/AIDS pandemic, the trafficking of women and children, and people whose only currencies were despair and cruelty.
Too many people continued to lack even the basics - water, sustenance, elementary education, health services - of a dignified life, Mr. Vieira de Mello continued. Some States believed that security and a rigorous respect of civil and political liberties were mutually exclusive. However, everyone had a right to security when faced with the ambitions of States, whether one's own or others. One could not compromise hard-won human rights to give States a free hand in fighting terrorism. There, again, one must draw a line.
The High Commissioner said that well-established international norms - the right not to be detained arbitrarily or imprisoned indefinitely, the right to due process of law, an impartial jury and an impartial judge, to legal representation, to be free from inhumane and degrading treatment - these norms were under siege today. The rule of law was his choice as an overarching theme in his work due to its universality and the fact that it was the most solid foundation of security.
The Chairperson of the 2003 session of the Commission, Ambassador Najat Al-Hajjaji of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, said that during the past year, the Middle East had not known peace, security and stability. The Palestinian people were still being humiliated, killed and deprived of self-determination. Black clouds were also gathering in the sky of the region and this was ominous of a catastrophic war which would certainly violate all human rights and especially the right to life.
Ms. Al-Hajjaji said that her Government felt that the resources available for the consultative services in the field of human rights carried out by the High Commissioner's Office were scarce. International cooperation in this field was therefore needed to reduce confrontation and criticism, and this could reduce tensions within the Commission. She was honoured to announce that her country was contributing $ 1 million to the consultative services programme organized by the High Commissioner’s Office, and a further $ 1 million to the voluntary funds for the victims of severe human rights violations and for other activities carried out by the High Commissioner’s Office.
Former Chairperson of the Commission, Ambassador Krzysztof Jakubowski of Poland, said the last session of the Commission had seen a record number of resolutions, decisions and Chairperson's statements adopted; the start of a successful reform of working methods process; the creation of important new mandates; the adoption of an important optional protocol to the Convention against Torture; and a record number of dignitaries address the Commission. Yet, the Commission had suffered from bad press. He stressed that the Commission's record reflected groundbreaking work in defining the content of human rights at the international level and setting their standards.
Also this morning, the Commission adopted its agenda and timetable. Under its agenda item on the organization of work of the Commission, representatives of Pakistan (on behalf of the Organization of Islamic States), South Africa (on behalf of the African Group), Malaysia (on behalf of the Asian Group), and Cuba took the floor.
At one point during the morning session, leaflets were thrown on participants of the Commission from the gallery reserved for non-governmental organizations.
The Commission will reconvene this afternoon at 3 p.m. to begin its three-and-a-half-day "high-level segment".

Opening Statements
NAJAT AL-HAJJAJI (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Chairperson of the Fifty-Ninth Session of the Commission on Human Rights, said that during the past year, the Middle East had not known peace, security and stability. The Palestinian people were still being humiliated, killed and deprived of self-determination. Black clouds were also gathering in the sky of the region and this was ominous of a catastrophic war which would certainly violate all human rights and especially the right to life. Terrorist attacks had continued to occur in various parts of the world encouraging some to prefer resorting to military force rather than international law. Reason and logic gave way to anger and frustration. Some countries had taken coercive measures violating the rights of migrants and refugees and minorities and even visa applicants. Sooner or later, wisdom and reason would have to be used to treat the root causes of the anger and frustration.
Time was precious, the Chairperson continued, and the agenda was heavy, covering economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights. Special attention would be given to the elimination of violence against women, since this phenomenon was related to inequality between men and women throughout history. There was nothing that could justify this violence.
Ms. Al-Hajjaji said that her Government felt that the resources available for the consultative services in the field of human rights carried out by the High Commissioner's Office were scarce. International cooperation in this field was therefore needed to reduce confrontation and criticism, and this could reduce tensions within the Commission. She was honoured to announce that her country was contributing $ 1 million to the consultative services programme organized by the High Commissioner’s Office, and a further $ 1 million to the voluntary funds for the victims of severe human rights violations and for other activities carried out by the High Commissioner’s Office.
SERGIO VIEIRA DE MELLO, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said the world has always been a place of turmoil. The Commission was meeting at a time of unusual convulsion in world affairs. He was not only speaking of those crises that dominated the headlines - he was speaking about the HIV/AIDS pandemic, the trafficking of women and children and people, whose only currencies were despair and cruelty. Security today was also threatened by hunger. There could be no security without the tools persons needed to live and to improve their lives. Too many people continued to lack even the basics - water, sustenance, elementary education, health services - of a dignified life.
One must never cease pursuing freedom from want, the rights to food and to development, Mr. Vieira de Mello said. Without them, security would be only a privilege of the powerful, and an endangered privilege at that, because it would be based on the faith that strong borders, mighty deterrence or authoritarian domestic rule brought security. This was a false sense of security - it was not based on rights. The fragile world needed guidance, but would the Commission be able to give that guidance? Some States believed that security and a rigorous respect of civil and political liberties were mutually exclusive. However, everyone had a right to security when faced with the ambitions of States, whether one's own or others. One could not compromise hard-won human rights to give States a free hand in fighting terrorism. There, again, one must draw a line. Well-established international norms - the right not to be detained arbitrarily or imprisoned indefinitely, the right to due process of law, an impartial jury and an impartial judge, to legal representation, to be free from inhumane and degrading treatment - these norms were under siege today.
When security was defined too narrowly - for example, as nothing more than a State's duty to protect its citizens - then the pursuit of security could lead to the violation of the human rights of those who were outside the circle of the protected. That circle might be defined in geographical or other terms. The problem remained the same. In this context, the High Commissioner for Human Rights mentioned the situation in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. He strongly urged the Commission to remember that questions of security were central to its mission - the protection and promotion of human rights. The culture of human rights must be a popular culture if it was to have the strength to withstand the blows that would inevitably come. Human-rights culture must be a popular culture if it was to be able to innovate and to be truly owned at the national and sub-national levels. He added that the recent inauguration of the International Criminal Court was a major step towards defending the principle of the security of civilians. His choice of the rule of law as an overarching theme in his own work was due not least to its universality. It was also the most solid foundation of security. Since taking office, he had sought to advance the rule of law in discussions with leaders of many countries. In conclusion, Mr. Vieira de Mello stressed the responsibility of the Commission to exercise leadership since the work of the Commission was critical to so many people.
NAJAT AL-HAJJAJI, Chairperson of the Commission, set the tone for the discussion over the weeks to come, saying that the session would be rooted in the international environment, and that links would be established with developments outside the building. This was the result of the complex natures of human rights and their interconnection with many facets of the life of societies. Certain basic rules would need to be respected, including that a sense of respect permeate the discussion. Language should and would remain respectful, whether opinions were shared or not. She invited the participants to behave appropriately with regard to the issues under discussion: human rights and fundamental freedoms.
KRZYSZTOF JAKUBOWSKI (Poland), Chairperson of the fifty-eighth session of the Commission on Human Rights, said that in spite of a number of challenging issues, the fifty-eighth session was able not only to complete its agenda but also to leave a significant positive mark on the history of the Commission on Human Rights. The last session had seen a record number of resolutions, decisions and Chairperson’s statements adopted; the start of a successful reform of working methods process; the creation of important new mandates; the adoption of an important optional protocol to the Convention against Torture; and a record number of dignitaries address the Commission. These achievements were possible because of a common commitment to the Commission by all participants and a commitment by members to moving forward on the basis of consensus.
Mr. Jakubowski noted that at times, the fifty-eighth session of the Commission had suffered from bad press. Some saw it as ineffective, others a chaotic place dominated by politics and expediency. It was difficult to accept these criticisms. Certainly the Commission had had its awkward times. Certainly it was a political place, but then again it was a political body. The Commission could reject many criticisms by standing by its record. That record contained groundbreaking work in defining the content of human rights at the international level and setting their standards. That record showed that the Commission took its protection role seriously, having constructed a large, sophisticated and ever-growing network of special procedures in the last thirty years. That record showed that the Commission was and had been prepared to assist in the promotion of human rights wherever it was needed or requested. That record showed that the Commission was arguably the most open UN political body in welcoming the ever-growing number of non-state participants into its work.
Mr. Jakubowski concluded by saying that the Commission should be and would always be judged by its results. At the end of the day those results came down to the respect for human rights in all parts of the world. Human rights were omni-present. There was no sphere of national or international life that should not be looked at from a human rights angle. The notion of human rights was the most overarching notion or the most important guiding principle underlying UN activities. It was important to strengthen the position of the human rights machinery not only in itself, but also as an important part of the UN community. The role of human rights was bound to get more and more important and then their promotion and protection in the perspective of the UN system would get increasingly laborious. That, in turn, would require additional efforts on the part of the Commission.

Statements on the Organization of Work of the Commission
SHAUKAT UMER (Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference), pledged complete cooperation with the Chairperson and the rules of procedure of the Commission. The promotion of human rights was an integral part of his religion's values. The protection and promotion of human rights were well reflected in Islamic culture and way of life. The Organization of Islamic Conference was, however, increasingly concerned about the polarisation witnessed in the Commission. The country-specific resolutions were the prime source of confrontation. Year after year, Islamic countries were targeted, he said. This was not only a concern to his country, but to all Islamic countries. In addition, the Organization regretted the fact that all resolutions sponsored by the developing and Islamic countries on issues such as defamation of religions, globalization, or the right to development were subjected to a vote.
Mr. Umer said the Organization of Islamic Conference had some longstanding concerns regarding the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Office needed to assimilate larger representation from the developing and Islamic countries which were least represented. Human rights were universal values, and the institution entrusted with their promotion and protection must reflect this in its personnel strength. The Organization felt that earmarked voluntary contributions dovetailed with appointment in the Office from the donor countries seriously undermined the independence of the Office of the High Commissioner. The continuation of this practice had led to donor countries ideological monopoly over the Office of the High Commissioner and a shift in the personnel strength heavily in their favour. The OIC therefore encouraged the donors to extend un-earmarked contributions to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
SIPHO GEORGE NENE (South Africa, speaking on behalf of the African Group), said that the fifty-ninth session of the Commission on Human Rights should herald a new beginning in the manner through which the body conducted its business. The Commission could not afford to shirk its responsibility of upholding the human rights obligations and rights enumerated in the two international covenants. It was incumbent upon every participant of the Commission to contribute towards the creation of a conducive environment, suitable for the cause of human rights. This could only be achieved if all participants adopted an attitude of openness and respect for one another. The question of approach and style as an underlying feature was therefore imperative.
Mr. Nene continued that the African Group desired to see this Commission characterized by a demonstrable willingness to move away from confrontation to cooperation. Members should try to bring to the plenary only those differences which they were unable to resolve in their informal consultations. The Commission should increase and intensify its consultation process as these reduced tensions and confrontations. In this respect, the principle of openness and transparency was fundamental. Hidden agendas and surprises were not helpful. The submission of resolutions, in particular country specific ones, to open consultations and even direct negotiations with concerned countries was the most viable route towards building consensus.
Mr. Nene said that the issue of balanced statements and resolutions could only be achieved if the Commission moved away from employing double standards. The depoliticization of the Commission’s work should be the paramount objective for all participants. If the Commission should succeed in creating the desired atmosphere, the participants would have greatly contributed to the lessening of tensions, which unfortunately characterized the current international political system.
RAJMAH HUSSAIN (Malaysia, speaking on behalf of the Asian Group), said that the Asian Group viewed it as important for the Commission to meet in an environment that befitted its stature and importance as an assembly that promoted and protected human rights. The Commission should be allowed to focus on substantive aspects of issues relating to the promotion and protection of human rights instead of getting bogged down in discussions on how to proceed on any particular issue. This was why the working methods of the Commission should be streamlined, and the introduction of the high-level segment was a step in the right direction with this in mind.
Further, the Asian Group believed that consensus building should be the preferred method of decision making. The enhancement of dialogue, consultation and the provision of greater transparency would enhance further the efforts to promote human rights. There was also a need for a more organized, wider and transparent consultation on all draft resolutions before their introduction.
JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDO PALACIOS (Cuba), said that it was necessary to make the working methods of the Commission more efficient. Cuba had been stressing the need to adopt innovative approaches for several years. The Commission had asked all participants to come up with specific proposals to improve its working methods. There was only consensus on some issues, he said. Unfortunately, challenges had been considerable as a result of the financial blackmail imposed upon the Commission by powerful donor countries. It was important to ensure that the functions of the Bureau, whether expanded or not, must only be of an organizational nature.
The fundamental problems which had afflicted the work of the body were not organizational, he said. It was the abuse of this forum for political domination and the repression of voices that dared express their difference of opinion. The danger of an imperial hegemony was a real threat, not only to Cuba but to the rest of the world. He stressed that cooperation was necessary to uphold the credibility of the Commission in the face of such dangers. He also referred to an incident earlier this morning when a non-governmental organization had disrespected the protocol of the Commission and disrupted speakers by throwing leaflets and propaganda on participants. It was hoped that this non-governmental organization would have its accreditation removed.



* *** *