Commission on Human Rights starts debate on right to development

Commission on Human Rights
57th session
27 March 2001
Afternoon





Foreign Minister of Afghanistan,
Chairman of Working Group and Independent
Expert on Right to Development Address Commission



The Commission on Human Rights this afternoon opened its debate on the right to development after concluding its discussion on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination.

Mohamed Salah Dembri, the Chairman-Rapporteur of the open-ended Working Group on the right to development, introduced the Group’s report and said that during its meetings, emphasis had been placed on the primary responsibility of States for creating national and international conditions favourable to the realization of the right to development through strengthening good governance, combatting corruption and increasing participation in and transparency of the decision-making process. Several countries had also emphasized the need to improve access of developing countries to world markets. Numerous participants had recommended that the international community should accord high priority to resolving the issue of foreign debt.

Arjun Sengupta, the Independent Expert on the right to development, said there had been a lot of progress in the movement to realize the right to development. It was important not to take a step backwards. The issues were difficult and complicated, and overnight unanimity should not be expected. He drew attention to the content of the right to development. Development was a process. It was not a one-time affair. If one step was violated, then the right to development itself was violated.

Also this afternoon, A. Abdullah, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan, addressed the Commission. He said the Afghan people were suffering from the most barbaric, inhuman and ignominious form of fanaticism. The Taliban were the most inhuman manifestation of this totalitarian fanaticism. The overwhelming majority of Muslim countries, the most prestigious Islamic institutions, and the most famous scholars and intellectuals of the Muslim world, all unequivocally condemned their actions. However, it was deeply saddening to observe that one Muslim country -- Pakistan -- was obstinately continuing to support the Taliban by every possible means -- including sending soldiers and war materials.

Speaking under the agenda item on the right to development were the Representatives of Sweden on behalf of the European Union, Kenya on behalf of the African Group, Syria, Senegal, Mexico on behalf of GRULAC, and Cuba.

Among other things, some speakers said that poverty in its extreme forms was an affront to human dignity and prevented the individual from effectively enjoying his or her human rights. Others said that in any agenda for the implementation of the right to development, national action, which was of primary importance, should be complemented by international action.

Ten non-governmental organizations (NGOs) took the floor, talking about discrimination against various ethnic and religious groups. They were the World Federation for Mental Health; the Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation; the Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru; International Educational Development; the International Young Catholic Students; the Indian Council of Education; the Indigenous World Association; the Minority Rights Group; the International Indian Treaty Council; and the International Human Rights Association of American Minorities.

Representatives of the United States, China, Cuba and the Philippines exercised their right of reply.

The Commission was scheduled to start an extended evening and night meeting from 6 p.m. until midnight to continue its debate on the right to development.


Statements on Racism and Racial Discrimination

A. ABDULLAH, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan, said Islam taught brotherhood, tolerance and respect for others. Its messages passed over ethnic, linguistic, racial and sexual barriers. It spoke to the whole of humankind and considered the human being to be God's creature and, as such, the noblest of creatures.

However, it was recognized that, like other religions and other cultures, Islam sometimes fell prey to extremists and fanatical movements which distorted its image. These minority movements which had developed among the peoples of Islam were, first of all, a danger to those peoples. Thus, the primary responsibility for unceasingly combatting and denouncing these fanatics and extremists lay with the Muslim peoples and governments. Today, the Afghan people were suffering the most barbaric, inhuman and ignominious form of fanaticism. The Taliban was the most inhuman manifestation of this totalitarian fanaticism. The overwhelming majority of Muslim countries, the most prestigious Islamic institutions, and the most famous scholars and intellectuals of the Muslim world, all unequivocally condemned the actions of the Taliban. However, it was deeply saddening to observe that one Muslim country -- Pakistan -- was obstinately continuing to support the Taliban by every possible means -- including sending soldiers and war materials. This suicidal policy deprived Pakistan of any right to speak in the name of Islam and tolerant Muslims.

The international community as a whole must also face up to its responsibilities. The defense of human rights could not consist merely by declarations of principles. The large-scale and systematic violations of human rights being committed demanded appropriate measures. It was regretted that the sanctions imposed on the Taliban by the United Nations Security Council took no account of the violations of human rights, and in particular, the imposition of sexual apartheid, of which Afghan women were victims, committed by the Taliban. The international community was demanding the extradition of Osama Ben Laden, who was protected by the Taliban and was accused of having instigated bombing attacks against American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Faced with the refusal of the Taliban, the Security Council had imposed an arms embargo on the Taliban, frozen Taliban assets abroad, restricted the travel of certain highly-placed persons in the movement, and restricted the representative offices of the Taliban abroad.

The solution which would bring an end to the suffering endured by the people of Afghanistan could only be a political one. The foundations on which peace would rest must be solid. Peace could only be based on the rule of law, democracy, respect for the universal values of human rights and the participation of all the groups which made up the nation. The rights of Afghan women must be fully recognized, and mechanisms through which the Afghan people could express their will freely must be set up. The first step could be the convening a Grand Representative Assembly to take necessary emergency measures. But until Pakistan ceases to interfere in the internal affairs of Afghanistan, the objective of peace seemed difficult to attain.

WILDA SPALDING, of the World Federation for Mental Health, said that one of the key components of mental health, and the healthy development of both an individual personality and community well-being, was the process of experiencing that one’s personal principles or ideas were respectfully listened to and understood, and that these principles contributed to the amelioration of one’s own life and the lives of those around them. Youth were sometimes listened to but were too rarely engaged in substantive, integrated trans-generational work on the issues that affected their life now and certainly impacted their future. Too often, youth were isolated both geographically and substantively - far away from the main work and power centres of human rights bodies.

RIYAZ PUNJABI, of the Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation, said the role played by the United Nations in combatting racial discrimination was gaining universal appreciation. The approaching World Conference against Racism underlined the efforts underway to combat the menace of xenophobia and all forms of discrimination. It still remained to be seen, on the face of the universal appreciation of the right of the people of the world to democratic and human governance, how the values of democracy could be promoted without the negative consequences of the mechanisms of electoral, representative democracy in the developing and underdeveloped corners of the world.

In many of these societies, the electoral mechanism with its emphasis on the politics of numbers created an ever-expanding basis for mass-mobilisation by harping on primordial loyalties. In many cases, States had supported discriminating policies of the majority with attendant lack of capacity to promote general good and greatest happiness of the greatest number. All this induced intolerance in neighbouring groups, leading to an unending spiral of xenophobic reactions from human collectivities that had shared the same geographic spaces for ages.

LAZARO PARY, of the Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru, said that racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance affected people throughout the world. At stake was the right of victims of racism for compensation and reparation. The origins of racism dated back to the conquest of the Americas and European colonization. Colonization engendered racial hatred and the despoiling of wealth and extreme poverty. The World Conference against Racism should re-establish the historical truth regarding the adverse effects of colonialism. The Commission was urged to appeal to the international community to examine its conscious; admit that racism and colonization were western phenomena; apologize for the human tragedy; and assume responsibility for the compensation of all the victims for the material and moral damage caused by conquests and colonization.

KAREN PARKER, of International Educational Development, said that while international law condemned racism, it also provided, as a last resort, a powerful remedy for groups subjected to prolonged and serious racism on the part of a government -- the right to self-determination from racist regimes. The organization was convinced that the Tamil people on the island of Ceylon clearly met the test of peoples with the right to self-determination under the classic international law model; they were an independent country prior to the colonial period but were forcibly amalgamated with another country under the colonial administrative policy of "unitary rule"; they had an identifiable territory, distinct language, culture, religion and ethnicity, and they had made their choice of separate sovereignty clearly and with strong leadership.

The Tamil people had suffered extreme racism at the hands of the Sinhala majority in Ceylon since the end of the British colonial period. The Commission was aware of this. The Government had clearly shown it sought a military solution to the conflict in Sri Lanka rather than a negotiated one. It had not reciprocated the LTTE’s unilaterally declared cease-fire. It also appeared that the Government was not cooperating with the Norwegian peace initiative undertaken in the spirit of neutrality and with no perceivable national interests other than a sincere search for peace.

HABIB BOU NAFEH, of the International Young Catholic Students, said that some educational programmes in schools and universities indirectly promoted difference which often became a source of conflict, intolerance and racism. International Young Catholic Students dreamt of a society that placed the human being at its centre, developing his or her identity and creativity. A society that was respectful of diversity and that offered equal opportunities for all. The organization also dreamt of schools and universities that promoted tolerance while recognizing the uniqueness of every student. The Commission was urged to promote solidarity among youth, groups and associations so as to contribute to the social integration of all members of society.

R. K. NAIK, of the Indian Council of Education, said it the conviction of the organization that very often it was the State structure that perpetuated discrimination and it was hoped that the World Conference against Racism would take cognisance of cases where the polity was so structured that it sanctioned discrimination based on religion, race, gender and ethnicity. Discrimination against one's fellow beings was primarily borne of a quest for power and control, a rather disagreeable facet of human nature. It became even more abhorrent when such discrimination was based on attributes over which a person had no control, such as one's descent or origin or the colour of one's skin. Such practices negated the essential truth of nature -- that all were born equal.

In India, there were many forms of discrimination that had little to do with race. India was a nation of many races, religions, languages, ethnic groups and creeds, as recognized by the Constitution. Its heterogenous character did not lend itself to the institutionalized practice of racism. However, discrimination did exist in the form of caste-based discrimination and oppression. The real problem that the Dalits of India faced had nothing to do with institutionalised racism. It had to do with ineffective implementation of the plethora of constitutional, legal and administrative provisions because of entrenched attitudes in many parts of Indian society.

RONALD BARNES, of the Indigenous World Association, said that colonialism was a form of racial discrimination. The death sentence of peoples and their relationship to land, culture and way of life was a virulent form of evil that perpetuated in Alaska, Hawaii, Cabinda and other parts of the world. For the indigenous peoples of the world, it had resulted in mental harm, cultural destruction, and even extinction of many indigenous peoples. The United States recognized the indigenous people of Alaska as independent tribes inhabiting an independent territory when Alexander I of Tsarist Russia attempted to claim title and dominion to Alaska. However, the United Nations and the United States did not take into account the factors and principles for Alaska and Hawaii when Alaska and Hawaii were removed from the list of Article 73 of the United Nations Charter. The United States stole Alaska and Hawaii. The Commission was urged to examine colonialism, racial apartheid and genocide in Alaska as it historically had done for South Africa.

C. CHAPMAN, of the Minority Rights Group, said a recent report found that the Batwa, the first peoples of the equatorial forests of the Great Lakes region, suffered from systematic discrimination, through negative stereotyping, segregation and the denial of basic human rights. As hunter-gatherers and former hunter-gatherers, the Batwa were commonly associated with the wild, uncivilized bush by their neighbours and stereotyped accordingly. Even in Rwanda, where referring to ethnic distinctions was against government policy, discrimination was justified by negative stereotyping. In addition to discrimination from their neighbours, the Batwa had also been stereotyped as poachers by many European and North American animal protectionists, which resulted in appalling discrimination against those Batwa living near national parks.

The Minority Rights Group recommended that the Batwas be recognized as first peoples of their countries, and that those countries demonstrate their commitment to respecting Batwa rights by upholding their obligations as contained within several international charters.

ANTONIO GONZALES, of the International Indian Treaty Council, said that throughout the United States, indigenous peoples, African Americans and poor communities had born a disproportionate environmental burden of oil refineries and chemical plants, pesticides used in industrial agriculture and other manufacturing processes. For indigenous peoples in the United States, environmental racism had meant, among others, the placing of nuclear industrial waste damps on reservation lands. In other parts of the world, other indigenous communities continued to suffer from the same or similar impact of contaminated water, destruction of habitat and environmental racism. Another aspect of environmental racism was the dumping of toxic wastes by the North in the poor countries of the South. Today, a disproportionately high number of Native Americans were incarcerated as a result of racism and its attendant poverty, alcoholism and drug abuse. Provided inadequate legal representation and discriminated against in the criminal justice system, Native Americans incarceration rates were astounding.

TAHIR MASOOD, of the International Human Rights Association of American Minorities, said no prescription for combatting racism could be made without taking stock of the past practices, their manifestations and after-effects. The international community must ensure that the perpetrators of racial discrimination and exploitation were held accountable and that the victims were provided with adequate compensation. Only this could be the best deterrent for future perpetrators of such heinous racial crimes.

In North America, the treatment and accompanying misery of the enslaved Africans 450 years ago had simply been reconverted into other forms of racially-motivated discriminatory practices, which today deprived millions of African-Americans of so-called equal opportunities and of the chance to escape from the inevitability of ghetto or prison life. The World Conference against Racism should reject neo-colonialism and call for a democratisation of the global economic and political order.


The Right to Development

Under this agenda item, the Commission has before it a report of the Secretary-General on the right to development (E/CN.4/2001/24). The report contains the replies received from the Governments of Burkina Faso, Cuba, the Czech Republic, India, Iraq and Kuwait as well as the reply received from UNESCO concerning the implementation of the various provisions of Commission on Human Rights resolution 2000/5.

There is a report by the High Commissioner on Human Rights on the right to development. The report addresses the issues of poverty alleviation, health, education, food, gender mainstreaming, racial discrimination, indigenous people, migrants and trafficked people, structural adjustment policies and debt, corporate responsibility, good governance, conflict prevention and resolution and new initiatives by the Office of the High Commissioner.

There is also a report by the open-ended Working Group on the right to development (E/CN.4/2001/26). The report analyses the work of previous working groups on the right to development and takes stoke of actions undertaken by UN specialized agencies, international financial institutions and other relevant international organizations to implement the right to development. It also addresses the role and responsibility of the State and the role of civil society in promoting the realization of the right to development and considers measures to improve international cooperation and the role of women in development.


Statements

MOHAMED-SALAH DEMBRI, the Chairman-Rapporteur of the open-ended Working Group on the right to development, introducing the report of the Working Group to the Commission, said that the Working Group had sought to achieve consensus and solidarity. The report contained a first section on its three sessions. The second part dealt with the Chairman's conclusions and comments by delegates to those conclusions. It also contained a presentation and discussion of the report of the Independent Expert and reviewed actions undertaken by the United Nations specialized agencies, international financial institutions and other relevant international organizations to realize the right to development. The report also addressed the priority that should be given to the realization of the right to food, health and education.

Emphasis was placed on the primary responsibility of States for creating national and international conditions favourable to the realization of the right to development through strengthening good governance, combatting corruption and increasing participation in and transparency of the decision-making process. Several countries also emphasized the need to improve access of developing countries to world markets. Some delegations highlighted the essential role of civil society in the implementation of the right to development. Numerous participants recommended that the international community should accord high priority to resolving the issue of foreign debt. Despite the difficulties surrounding the issue of the right to development, both at an operational and conceptual level, all participants had shown great interest in the topic, underlying its importance.

ARJUN SENGUPTA, the Independent Expert on the right to development, said there had been a lot of progress in the movement to realize the right to development. It was important not to take a step backwards. The issues were difficult and complicated, and overnight unanimity should not be expected. Attention was drawn to the content to the right to development. Development was a process. It was not a one-time affair. The right to development meant the process would move from one step to the next. If one step was violated, then the right to development itself was violated.

There was a consensus on the fact that the right to development was a human right. This was first attempted in the early 1940s, and it took many years for the international community to realize this, which it finally did with the Vienna Convention. It was the duty of the international community to find a way to cooperate. This had to be done through consultations and discussions. There was more to do than the handing out money. With any kind of development, an essential element was a major social safety net. Without it, development could not be realized.

JOHAN MOLANDER (Sweden), on behalf of the European Union, said poverty in its extreme forms was an affront to human dignity and prevented the individual from effectively enjoying his or her human rights. Human rights offered a common set of values in the struggle against poverty. They were a powerful tool for empowering people living in poverty to have a greater say in the decisions which affected their lives. The European Union welcomed the message from the World Summit for Social Development that the promotion and protection of human rights were essential for the realisation of social and people-centred development.

The European Union strongly believed that the promotion and protection of human rights should form an integral part of any policy to combat poverty. This meant developing policies that were built on the principles of participation, inclusion and accountability for human rights obligations to poor people. These principles provided a basis for building societies in which every individual could secure a sustainable livelihood and enjoy a life in dignity through equal access to the opportunities and benefits of development.

AMINA C. MOHAMED (Kenya), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said her Group welcomed all efforts to operationalize the right to development and it recognized, in particular, the efforts of the Independent Expert to clarify the state of progress in the implementation of the right and to elaborate on strategies for its implementation, including the notion of a development compact. The Group could not agree more with the Expert's analysis that in any agenda for implementation of the right to development, national action, which was of primary importance, should be complemented by international action. The Group concurred with him that with the increased integration of the global economy, the policies and actions of a State at the national level were circumscribed by the interaction between States, policies adopted by other States, and the overall international environment.

With regard to the content of the right to development, the African Group would like to underline the key importance of the right in the alleviation of poverty. Poverty had been increasingly recognized as both a cause and a consequence of the denial of human rights, and eradicating extreme poverty remained the greatest human rights challenge faced by the African Group. The international community should focus more on that aspect of the right to development.

IBRAHIM IBRAHIM (Syrian Arab Republic) recalled that the right to development had been proclaimed an inalienable right in numerous international instruments. This right covered all aspects of life of individuals and communities. It concerned human life, including the right to food, health and security. A huge gap existed between wishes and reality which was due in particular to the unwillingness of developed countries to assist developing countries. Bridging the gap between the two categories of countries was becoming more and more difficult. The international community had pledged to eliminate poverty, but the risk now was that the poor would be eliminated, not poverty. The expenditure on armaments by a single country would suffice to resolve the problem of food security in more than one country.

One example of the adverse effects of armed conflicts on the realization of the right to development was the Israeli occupation of Arab territories. Israeli practices, including the establishment of settlements and the expropriation of land, had seriously affected the Palestinian people and had deprived Syria of its resources in the Golan. This called for solidarity by the international community to put an end to the Israeli occupation and enable the Palestinian people to recover their right to development.

ABSA CLAUDE DIALLO (Senegal) said there were still obstacles which obstructed the implementation of the right to development fifteen years after its adoption by the General Assembly in 1986. It should not be ignored that today, the majority of humanity was becoming increasingly poor and was living in misery because of instability, tension and frustrations which compromised the effective enjoyment of all human rights. In many countries, the social development indicators in the fields of education, health, food and environmental protection were in a bad state. The negative effect of the process of globalization had also contributed to that state. In addition, the expansion of illnesses such as malaria, tuberculosis, and AIDS had constituted a serious threat to the right to development.

In Sub-Saharan Africa, 59 per cent of the population in rural areas and 43 per cent in the urban areas lived below the poverty line. Some of the factors attributed to this situation were the negative tendency of public assistance to development because of the unbearable debt burden and the various tariff barriers which hampered African access to international markets. In addition, because of internal and external constraints, the role of States in the promotion and protection of economic, social and cultural rights of citizens had diminished.

PERLA CARVALHO (Mexico), on behalf of GRULAC, wished to underline the importance of the right to development in creating a more just world. Fifteen years ago, the United Nations General Assembly had adopted the Declaration on the Right to Development which established that the right to development was an inalienable right and an integral part of all fundamental rights. Later, the World Conference on Human Rights, held in Vienna in 1993, had confirmed the universality of the right to development. In the recent Millennium Declaration, Heads of State and Governments made an appeal to give effect to all to the right to development and to free mankind of poverty. Finally, the Commission on Human Rights in its previous session had adopted a resolution according high priority to this right.

Mexico called for the mandate of the Independent Expert on the right to development to be extended in order to enable him to address the impact on the realization of human rights of macroeconomic decisions at the international level; poverty eradication; debt burden; international trade; access to international markets; the operations of international financial institutions; technology transfer; the reduction of the knowledge gap; the impact of intellectual property rights; the effects of migration; and compliance with international commitments in the area of development.

JORGE IVAN MORA GODOY (Cuba) said that today, the world had more than 800 million hungry people, 1 billion illiterate persons, 4 billion poor inhabitants, 250 million children who were regular workers, and 130 million persons without any possibilities for education, among others. According to a recent World Bank report, half of the 6 billion inhabitants on Earth lived on less than two dollars a day, and 1.3 billion lived on less than one dollar a day. The 225 richest persons in the world owned the equivalent of the annual income of 2.5 billion persons. The cost of only one nuclear bomb was equal to the budget devoted to education in 23 developing countries with an infant population larger than 160 million. The price of a war was enough to build schools for 30,000 students.

The population of Cuba was the victim of the cruellest and most unfair action against the development of a small country. The action was the criminal blockade imposed against Cuba by the United States’ Government. The blockade had consisted of prohibiting access to its markets, of impeding access to international credits and finances, of preventing the pursuing of interests of investing in Cuba all around world, and of bullying Cuba's commercial partners, among other things. It had also consisted of trying to kill Cubans through hunger and diseases by impeding the access to food, medication and medical equipments.


Rights of Reply

A Representative of the United States, speaking in right of reply, said that the statement made earlier in the day by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Cuba illustrated how far Cuba went in hiding the truth with regard to the violation of human rights in the country. On 10 December 2000, the Government of Cuba had celebrated International Human Rights Day with the arrest of 200 political activists. Two Czech citizens, one of them a member of parliament, had been recently arrested for meeting with Cuban political activists. Some 300 political activists lingered in jail. The American Commission on Human Rights had denounced the systematic violation of human rights in Cuba. The Committee against Torture had also denounced the violation of the Convention against Torture in Cuba. Cuba also refused to allow the Special Rapporteur on torture to enter the country and the Commission on Human Rights had adopted last year a resolution denouncing human rights violations in Cuba.

A Representative of China, speaking in right of reply, said he rejected the unwarranted accusation and attack by the Foreign Minister of Germany against his country. It was part of biased statements by Western politicians. China had banned the Falun Gong group which was not a religion at all. It took the decision to protect its people and also members of that movement, which was anti-society.

A Representative of Cuba, speaking in right of reply, said that the United States’ model of democracy was in a structural crisis and had virtually stopped functioning. Half of the population in the United States could not read and half did not vote. Further, the electoral system enabled the election of candidates who did not enjoy majority support. The racial situation was also gloomy with lynchings and shootings at the southern border. Cuba suggested that an inquiry should be made into the irregularities observed in the electoral campaign in the United States.

A Representative of the Philippines, speaking in right of reply, said the visit of the Independent Expert on the right to development was untimely and it would have been preferable that he did it when the authorities were able to meet and exchange views with him. The Expert should examine the link between the creation of wealth and jobs and the right to development because they were the best way to promote and develop this right. It was also important to evaluate the impact of economic decisions, including on debt, on realization of the right to development.



* *** *