Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Commission on Human Rights
Default title
23 March 2000
Share
Commission on Human Rights
56th session
23 March 2000
Morning
Hears Statements by High-Level Government Officials From Belarus,
Angola,the United Kingdom, France, the Slovak Republic and South Africa
The Commission on Human Rights this morning concluded its debate on the right of peoples to self-determination and its application to peoples under colonial or alien domination or foreign occupation.
The Commission also heard statements from Government dignitaries from Belarus, Angola, the United Kingdom, France, the Slovak Republic and South Africa.
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Belarus, Ural Latypov, said his country was concerned about international terrorism. He urged the international community to act upon the Vienna Declaration and the Programme of Action in order to take steps against terrorism. He also recommended the establishment of a functional commission of the Economic and Social Council on the issue.
Angolan Deputy Minister for External Relations, Georges Chikoty, complained that due to outside incitement from some countries and persons, and despite the relevant United Nations resolutions, UNITA did not accept the results of the last elections, preferring to return to war with the hope of taking power by the force of weapons. Since then, Angola was once more experiencing a war situation that had already caused around 3 million internal refugees, without counting the 2 million dead and more than 100,000 people mutilated in the conflict.
Peter Hain, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, said that while the international slave trade had become a dark chapter of the world's history, contemporary forms of slavery still persisted. In too many countries slavery, bonded labour, forced prostitution and other forms of abusive labour continued, with the victims being poor and weak, without power or resources and often without a political voice. Women and children were particularly vulnerable, becoming targets for traffickers and serious physical and psychological abuse.
French Minister Delegate for Cooperation and Francophonie, Charles Josselin, questioned whether the cause of human rights had progressed since last year, saying that the world was in a state of far-reaching change due to globalization and the uniformization of economic models. There were many historic, cultural and religious differences in the world, however they should not prevent the Commission from reaching a common ground.
Pal Csaky, Deputy Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic, told the Commission that his country had committed itself to building a tolerant society and creating equal opportunities for all its citizens and did its best to integrate the Roma community into the society and at the same time to respect their ethnic traditions and human rights.
And the Director-General of the Department of Foreign Affairs of South Africa, Sipho M. Pityana said that his country had accepted to host the Third World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in 2001. He hoped that with the help of other Governments and non-governmental organizations, practical outcomes to the objectives laid down by the General Assembly would be achieved.
During the discussion on self-determination, many speakers underlined the need for the implementation of that principle in accordance to the relevant United Nations documents. The continuation of the peace process in the Middle East and the application of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people was underlined by several speakers. The situation in Chechnya was also underscored with speakers urging an end to the conflict.
The Representatives of the following Member and Observer delegations took the floor this morning: Botswana, Cuba, Palestine, Egypt, Qatar, Mauritania, Algeria, Jordan, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Libya.
The Representatives of the World Muslim Congress and the Indian Movement 'Tupaj Amaru' also spoke.
The next plenary of the Commission will be held at 3.30 p.m., when it is expected to take up its agenda item on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination, by hearing the annual report of its Special Rapporteur on the topic, Maurice Glele-Ahanhanzo.
Statements
URAL LATYPOV, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus, said that the protection of human rights was the responsibility of each country and the world community as a whole. The delegation of Belarus supported the new initiatives of reform taken by the Commission which allowed adequate reaction to the challenges of time, particularly the de-politicization of the activities of the Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and the balance between thematic procedures in the field of civil and political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights.
Mr. Latypov invited the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers to Belarus to investigate issues under his mandate. This would contribute to the judicial reform underway in the country. The new criminal procedural code had already been adopted in 1999. It ensured the citizen's right to judicial protection and raised the role of lawyers. The use of human rights rhetoric as a tool of promoting political and economic interests contradicted the human rights concept itself. Unilateral measures taken towards a sovereign country would discredit the principle of participation of the international community in ensuring the observation of human rights.
Mr. Latypov was concerned about international terrorism, and urged the world to act on the Vienna Declaration and the Programme of Action and take steps against terrorism. He recommended the establishment of a functional commission of the Economic and Social Council on the issue. Belarus's reservation to Article 20 of the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment would be lifted, and the second reading of the law on the Ombudsman was under way in the Belarusian Parliament. Political reform was also progressing. For example, the Electoral Code had been produced in cooperation with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Council of Europe.
GEORGE CHIKOTY, Deputy Minister of External Relations of Angola, said that his country had been a systematic victim of armed aggression and destabilization provoked by external agents from the time of the apartheid regime in South Africa up to the full independence of Angola. The aggression had destroyed a major part of the country's infrastructure, caused the death of thousands of people, mutilated victims of war and resulted in more than a million internally displaced persons.
With the end of the Cold War, Mr. Chikoty continued, the Angolan Government started a whole set of actions with the aim of pacifying the country and reconciling all Angolans. This had led to holding the first democratic elections involving the whole population, including Jonas Savimbi's UNITA. Due to outside incitement from some countries and persons, and despite the relevant United Nations resolutions, UNITA did not accept the results of those elections, preferring to return to war with the hope of taking power by the force of weapons. Since then, Angola was once more experiencing a war situation that had already caused around 3 million internal refugees who lived on humanitarian emergency aid. This was in addition to the 2 million dead and more than 100,000 people mutilated in the conflict.
Mr. Chikoty said that his Government believed that issues relating to the promotion of fundamental rights and liberties were particularly important. Angola was developing a vast programme of cooperation with the United Nations, which had enabled it, among many other things, to accelerate the process of incorporating international human rights standards into its internal legal system. The democratic process under way was far-reaching and irreversible, and in it Angola could highlight the consolidation and recognition of fundamental rights and liberties of citizens, national unity and reconciliation between Angolans.
PETER HAIN, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, said that while the international slave trade had become a dark chapter of the world's history, contemporary forms of slavery still persisted. In too many countries slavery, bonded labour, forced prostitution and other forms of abusive labour continued, with the victims being poor and weak, without power or resources and often without a political voice. Women and children were
particularly vulnerable, becoming targets for traffickers and serious physical and psychological abuse. Children also suffered from abusive labour practices. Over 250 million children were engaged in child labour, some no more than four years old. It was vital that the new International Labour Office Convention 182 on the worst forms of child labour enter into force as soon as possible.
Whilst hundreds of millions grew ever richer, some 1.3 million people - two thirds of them women - had no access to adequate food, water, sanitation, essential health care or primary education. Around 35,000 young children died each day because of preventable diseases. The benefits of globalization needed to be equitable and sustainable. A fundamental step was the removal of debt burden. Too many poor countries had been forced for too long to spend millions more on their debt interest payment than they were able to invest in the young, the sick, the undernourished and the poor. Britain had therefore removed all bilateral debts owned to the United Kingdom by the 41 Heavily Indebted Countries. The benefits of debt relief should be used to make education a priority in the developing world. Although Britain had increased its overseas development assistance, there had been a world wide drop in such aid.
Mr. Hain said there was still too much oppression and denial of human rights across the world, as recent events in Chechnya and China demonstrated, but there had been important progress too in Central and Eastern Europe, in Latin America and in Africa, where democracy continued to emerge. Dialogue with the UN institutions, and not just within UN fora, was central to building mutual respect and understanding. In this context, it was hard to understand why so many requests for visits by UN Special Rapporteurs went unanswered.
CHARLES JOSSELIN, Minister Delegate for Cooperation and Francophonie of France, hoped this session would serve not only as a forum for pious wishes but to re-assert equality, democracy, peace and humanism. The World Conference against Racism would be an opportunity to address human rights violations, as would the conference on racism to be held in Strasbourg in October. He commended the work done by the Commission and people in the field and drew particular attention to non-governmental organizations as the best messengers of the indignities suffered around the world by civil societies.
Mr. Josselin questioned whether the cause of human rights has progressed since last year. The world was in a state of far-reaching change due to globalization and the uniformization of economic models. There were many historic, cultural and religious differences in the world, however this should not prevent the Commission from reaching a common ground. France saw China's signing of the two Conventions of 1966 on political and civil rights, and economic, social and cultural rights, as a positive sign. France recommended that China end the repression of dissidents, abolish capital punishment and remove the restrictions on freedom of association.
French public opinion was shocked by the testimonies from Chechnya and expected an independent investigation on this issue. France urged the Russian Federation for a cease-fire. Mr. Josselin said Russia should aim at a democratic and peaceful future and should avoid military solutions. The political context had to promote peace. He commended the positive reports from Croatia and Senegal and their political stability and peaceful elections, and hoped the same for Indonesia.
Those responsible for human rights violations should be held accountable, Mr. Josselin said. France had ratified the convention concerning the International Criminal Court. France had adopted laws on equality between men and women. Capital punishment was condemned as opposing the work of the Commission and France appealed for its abolishment. The right to subsistence and dignity had to be protected. Better treatment of the debt problem was encouraged. No rights should be neglected and political and civil rights were as important as economic, social and cultural rights.
PAL CSAKY, Deputy Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic for Human Rights, Minorities and Regional Development, said the end of history, envisaged by some after the fall of the Berlin Wall, turned out to be just another illusion. The new multi-polar world was facing major problems, including hardly manageable internal conflicts of ethnic, tribal or religious problems, alarming rates of poverty in some developing countries, and humanitarian disasters caused by nature and by men. On the other hand, the challenges of economic globalization and the revolution of the information technologies had to be met.
Still, it was undeniable that considerable progress had been achieved in the field of the enhancement of human rights mechanisms and instruments. One of the most important developments in the field of human rights was the ever spreading acceptance by the international community of the concept that violations of human rights and disrespect for human dignity could not be justified by the notion of national sovereignty. Slovakia had followed with deep regret and anxiety the situation in the former Yugoslavia. The situation in Kosovo was far from being settled as animosities rooted in long-lasting discrimination were very difficult to overcome. In this context, Slovakia welcomed the considerable progress towards lasting peace in the Middle East.
Slovakia had abolished the death penalty and valued highly the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination and Intolerance which would be held next year in South Africa. Slovakia had also committed itself to building a tolerant society and creating equal opportunities for all its citizens. It did its best to integrate the Roma community into the society and at the same time to respect their ethnic traditions and human rights.
SIPHO M. PITYANA, Director-General of the Department of Foreign Affairs of South Africa, said that South Africa had, since its return to the United Nations in 1994, established a democratic constitutional State and institutions to protect democracy. These institutions included the National Human Rights Commission, an independent judiciary, the Office of the Auditor General, the Office of the Public Protector and others. He thanked the Commission for the two conventions elaborated by the Commission which had helped to end apartheid, the Convention against Apartheid and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. This was the background to South Africa accepting to host the Third World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in 2001. In hosting the Conference, South Africa hoped that with the help of other Governments and NGOs, practical outcomes to the objectives laid down by the General Assembly would be achieved. Mr. Pityana appealed to the delegations to assist South Africa with financial resources for the Conference.
As Chair of the Non-Aligned Movement, South Africa hoped the Commission could forge a consensus on the right to development ahead of the first session of the working group. He urged the Commission to remove obstacles to the implementation of the right to development, promote national development planning based on human rights norms, encourage national human rights action plans to integrate all human rights, call on national institutions to incorporate the right to development into their mandates, and promote human rights education as a link between human rights and development.
Mr. Pityana was concerned about the failure of the Commission to fully implement the Declaration of Human Rights Defenders. His country would assist in the establishment of a new mechanism to ensure the implementation of the Declaration. South Africa had over the past year presented its first periodic report under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and it welcomed the adoption of the two optional protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, particularly the agreement to raise the minimum age for the participation of child soldiers in armed conflicts.
LEGWAILA LEGWAILA (Botswana) said the right to self-determination had long been accepted as an immutable right for all peoples. Botswana had always supported the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and would continue to do so as long as their yearning for a homeland of their own remained unfulfilled. The current peace process was a labourious one and was frustratingly characterized by a lack of predictability. It was prone to interminable stalemates and periodic spasms of doom and hopelessness.
Botswana believed that self-determination for the Palestinians could not be achieved or if achieved could not be sustained as long as Israel remained a veritable endangered species in the Middle East, with some of its neighbours still implacably sworn to the total annihilation of the Jewish State. A tit-for-tat culture of violence could never solve the Middle East problem.
Israel would never find peace and security at the expense of the freedom and peace of the Palestinian people. The right of the Jewish nation or people to self-determination, to a country or homeland of their own, could not supersede the right of the Palestinian people to have a country or home land of their own. The two parties had achieved a great deal to date and they deserved the support of the international community in their arduous struggle for peace and reconciliation in one of the most dangerous areas of our troubled world. True peace however could be achieved only with a regional accommodation between Israel and the Arab world, including a peaceful settlement of the Golan problem and the occupation by Israel of southern Lebanon.
JORGE FERRER RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said that although colonialism had been abolished as a system, new developments were taking place, particularly against developing States. New political domination was imposed against them in the form of rights and humanitarian interventions. Foreign political models were imposed as universal values. Self-determination was the inalienable right of people to establish and organize their political system, decide on their economic, social and cultural development, and decide on the use of their natural resources.
The international community should reject any interpretation of self-determination other than that of the Charter of the United Nations and other related decisions and resolutions by UN organs. Cuba wanted the reintegration of its territory of Guantnamo which was illegally occupied by a North American naval base. The continued occupation was against the independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of Cuba, and most particularly it was a flagrant violation of the right to self-determination of the Cuban people. In addition, Cuba welcomed the report of the Special Rapporteur on the use of mercenaries. During the last 40 years, Cuba had been a victim of mercenary activities, promoted and financed with impunity from the United States, with the tolerance of the authorities there.
NABIL RAMLAWI (Palestine) said Israel killed human beings, dispossessing them of their rights and violating the very principles which formed the basis of democracy. Israel continued to occupy the Palestinian territory and this foreign occupation could not be justified since it constituted, according to the international community and international public law, an aggression and a crime disturbing the peace and security of humanity. It should be unconditionally terminated. It could not be allowed for only one part of the UN Partition Resolution to be admitted while the other one was ignored. The official borders of Israel were those delineated in the partition plan and the presence of Israelis outside those borders was an illegal and unacceptable occupation.
The core of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict had always been the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people who had lived in Palestine for thousands of years. The United Nations General Assembly had examined this issue since 1947 and adopted successive resolutions, all of which affirmed the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people. The international community stood today helpless in front of the implementation of its will in connection with the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people. This was due to the policy of selectivity and double standards which characterized the implementation of the principles of international law, reflecting the weakness and helplessness of the international community in giving effect to its resolutions in the face of the practices of aggression and occupation that Israel persisted on. These aggressions included expansion of existing settlements and establishment of new ones on Palestinian land, denial of the right to return and the refusal of the right of the Palestinian people to establish their independent and sovereign Palestinian State.
FAYZA ABOULNAGA (Egypt) said the right to self-determination was one of the pillars of the international system as embodied in the UN Charter, without which one could not speak of human rights. All rights were directly affected by the right to self-determination. The Palestinian people were still fighting for the right to self-determination and Israeli behaviour continued. The recent vote by the European Union on the need to recognize the right of the Palestinian people to the right to self-determination showed that it was time for Israel to end the occupation.
Egypt appealed to the United Nations, specialized agencies and the Commission to play their role in assisting the Palestinian people, and to make Israel fulfill its international obligations, respect the principle of land for peace and honour the commitments and promises it has made. It was time the Palestinians had a free sovereign State. Egypt was promoting peace in the region, living up to its international obligations and respecting human rights. Egypt hoped the impending meeting between President Bill Clinton of the United States and President Hafez Assad of Syria would move the peace process forward. Egypt awaited the application of promises made long ago.
CHEIKH FAHAD AWAIDA AL-THANI (Qatar) said the continued occupation of the Palestinian land by Israel was a violation of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people. The occupation, which included Jerusalem, was against the universally accepted principle of self-determination. Israel had to abide by the Madrid Accords which advocated the exchange of land for peace. Without a real peace process and agreement in the region, there would be no lasting peace. Israel had to respect the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people.
MOHAMED YAHYA OULD SIDI HAIBA (Mauritania) said the right of people to self-determination was enshrined in the UN Charter and was the basis for human rights to be properly achieved. The Palestinian people had not had this opportunity and had been denied this fundamental right. The peace talks were commended and hopes were expressed as to the speeding up of the peace process. It was time for the Paestinian people to enjoy the right to self-determination. The discussion under agenda item 5 reminded the Commission of the importance of establishing a lasting peace in the region in accordance with international law. The Commission was recommended to continue to give priority to the establishment of the national rights of the Palestinian people and to promote justice, equlity and stability in the region.
MOHAMED SALAH DEMBRI (Algeria) regretted that the right to self-determination was still on the working agenda and that people were still denied this fundamental right. Therefore there had to be a stronger commitment to self-determination by the international community. The Palestinian people were one of the last peoples waiting to have access to this right, as Pope Jean-Paul II stated yesterday. Algeria urged the Commission to accept no more delaying tactics preventing Palestinians from the exercise of this right. Algeria hoped that this situation would improve in keeping with international legality, and would result in a sovereign, independent Palestinian State. History had shown that waiting for people to give up the right to self-determination was the wrong answer to the right question.
SHEHAB MADI (Jordan) said the right of people under alien occupation to self-determination was enshrined in the first article of the UN Charter. For many decades, the Palestinian people had been deprived of this fundamental right under Israeli occupation. Severe and systematic violation of this basic human right among many others was coupled by disregard of human rights instruments as well as international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions. Nine years had passed since peace talks were boldly launched in Madrid setting a clear and hopeful vision for the region. Today, these talks seemed to timidly stagger and limp their way on amid the many blows and setbacks which were mainly due to extremist elements from both sides of the divide who tried to impose their own agendas of violence and hatred in the region.
Israeli commitment to the implementation of the peace accords was the only guarantee for a durable and secure peace. Respect of deadlines was of utmost importance. Without addressing the root causes of the conflict on the basis of equality, justice and respect of each other's right, and without fully implementing accords, there would be no real peace. Continuing unilateral actions and settlement building polices aimed at changing the status quo in the occupied territories, particularly of Jerusalem, would not help. Denying the fundamental right of Palestinian people to self-determination on their own soil as well as their right to the establishment of their own independent State on this soil would not help either.
KAREN NAZARIAN (Armenia) said that the right to self-determination constituted one of the major principles of international law on which rested the community of democratic States as well as the United Nations. Throughout history, nations had exercised their fundamental right to self-determination over and over again. Attempts to curtail or deny the multiple implementation of that right by limiting it to only one-time enjoyment should be considered a gross violation of human rights. To stop the exercise of that right and the right to forge one's national destiny independently would lead to armed conflict, aggression, destruction, and refugee and migration problems. It would also raise regional unrest and turbulence and threaten the security of neighbouring States. Those acts constituted unacceptable violations of human rights. Armenia defended and pursued the full implementation of peoples' rights to self-determination through peaceful means. It actively supported all legal claims and efforts in that respect in other parts of the globe.
TOFIG MUSAYEV (Azerbaijan) said the right to self-determination played a part in realizing other human rights by providing the general framework and foundation for the implementation andpromotion of human rights. The right to self-determination had been incorporated in international instruments but it was not meant to encourage secessionist movements or foreign interference and aggression. This right had to contribute to safeguarding the political independence and territorial integrity of States, ensuring non-interference in internal affairs and promoting international cooperation. The right to self-determination should not be used as justification for territorial expansionism under the pretext of care for ethnic groups in other States. The Republic of Armenia was still proclaiming the cause of the conflict between the two States as 'the strife for self-determination of the Armenian community in the Nagorno-Karabakh region of the Republic of Azerbaijan'. Azerbaijan could serve as an example to the opinion that in order to avoid bloody conflict, the international community had to be careful about every case of proclamation of the exercise of the right to self-determination and distinguish self-determination from aggression.
NAJAT AL HAJJAJI (Libya) said the beginning of the nineties saw a new concept of humanitarian interventions. These selective interventions demonstrated that the major powers sought only to expand their power, while having no interest in protecting human rights. In the shadow of globalization, which destroyed all barriers, certain countries were taking advantage of the weakness of other countries. Intervention under the pretext of protecting human rights amounted to a flagrant violation of human rights and the UN Charter. The countries carrying out these interventions were trying to sap the very foundations of human rights in an attempt to Balkanise the world. The principle of national sovereignty and of independence was thus being violated. Weak countries did not want to depend on the whims of certain States which interfered in their internal affairs under the pretext of international law.
MAQBOOL AHMAD, of the World Muslim Congress, said that the Chechen people, having their own distinct identity, culture, religion and language, were initially colonized in the middle of the nineteenth century through brutal conquest. Their lands were confiscated and distributed to Russian settlers. Chechens had been made to suffer injustice and humilation. They had never been given the option to freely choose the kind of relationship with Russia they would find acceptable. In addition, the people of Palestine had a right to their own independent State in implementation of their right to self-determination. In their bid to attain nationhood and vacant alien occupation, Palestinians needed support and understanding of all freedom- loving people. In Kashmir, since 1989, the Indian army had killed 60,000 Kashmiris. Kashmir also had the right to self-determination.
JACQUELINE HERRERA, of the Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru, said that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) campaign in Kosovo had been a brutal war led by one military power, namely the United States. The air campaign caused indiscriminate deaths and great material damage. In 80 days, NATO had carried out 35,7888 combat operations. NATO and the United States had the obligation to compensate victims, among whom were vast numbers of refugees seeking refuge from the bombing campaign. The intervention, which amounted to a gross violation of human rights, the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions, constituted a crime against humanity. Furthermore, it did not have the approval of the UN Security Council, which according to article 24 of the UN Charter, held primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. The NATO attach set a dangerous precedent regarding intervention in conflicts.
****
56th session
23 March 2000
Morning
Hears Statements by High-Level Government Officials From Belarus,
Angola,the United Kingdom, France, the Slovak Republic and South Africa
The Commission on Human Rights this morning concluded its debate on the right of peoples to self-determination and its application to peoples under colonial or alien domination or foreign occupation.
The Commission also heard statements from Government dignitaries from Belarus, Angola, the United Kingdom, France, the Slovak Republic and South Africa.
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Belarus, Ural Latypov, said his country was concerned about international terrorism. He urged the international community to act upon the Vienna Declaration and the Programme of Action in order to take steps against terrorism. He also recommended the establishment of a functional commission of the Economic and Social Council on the issue.
Angolan Deputy Minister for External Relations, Georges Chikoty, complained that due to outside incitement from some countries and persons, and despite the relevant United Nations resolutions, UNITA did not accept the results of the last elections, preferring to return to war with the hope of taking power by the force of weapons. Since then, Angola was once more experiencing a war situation that had already caused around 3 million internal refugees, without counting the 2 million dead and more than 100,000 people mutilated in the conflict.
Peter Hain, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, said that while the international slave trade had become a dark chapter of the world's history, contemporary forms of slavery still persisted. In too many countries slavery, bonded labour, forced prostitution and other forms of abusive labour continued, with the victims being poor and weak, without power or resources and often without a political voice. Women and children were particularly vulnerable, becoming targets for traffickers and serious physical and psychological abuse.
French Minister Delegate for Cooperation and Francophonie, Charles Josselin, questioned whether the cause of human rights had progressed since last year, saying that the world was in a state of far-reaching change due to globalization and the uniformization of economic models. There were many historic, cultural and religious differences in the world, however they should not prevent the Commission from reaching a common ground.
Pal Csaky, Deputy Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic, told the Commission that his country had committed itself to building a tolerant society and creating equal opportunities for all its citizens and did its best to integrate the Roma community into the society and at the same time to respect their ethnic traditions and human rights.
And the Director-General of the Department of Foreign Affairs of South Africa, Sipho M. Pityana said that his country had accepted to host the Third World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in 2001. He hoped that with the help of other Governments and non-governmental organizations, practical outcomes to the objectives laid down by the General Assembly would be achieved.
During the discussion on self-determination, many speakers underlined the need for the implementation of that principle in accordance to the relevant United Nations documents. The continuation of the peace process in the Middle East and the application of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people was underlined by several speakers. The situation in Chechnya was also underscored with speakers urging an end to the conflict.
The Representatives of the following Member and Observer delegations took the floor this morning: Botswana, Cuba, Palestine, Egypt, Qatar, Mauritania, Algeria, Jordan, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Libya.
The Representatives of the World Muslim Congress and the Indian Movement 'Tupaj Amaru' also spoke.
The next plenary of the Commission will be held at 3.30 p.m., when it is expected to take up its agenda item on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination, by hearing the annual report of its Special Rapporteur on the topic, Maurice Glele-Ahanhanzo.
Statements
URAL LATYPOV, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus, said that the protection of human rights was the responsibility of each country and the world community as a whole. The delegation of Belarus supported the new initiatives of reform taken by the Commission which allowed adequate reaction to the challenges of time, particularly the de-politicization of the activities of the Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and the balance between thematic procedures in the field of civil and political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights.
Mr. Latypov invited the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers to Belarus to investigate issues under his mandate. This would contribute to the judicial reform underway in the country. The new criminal procedural code had already been adopted in 1999. It ensured the citizen's right to judicial protection and raised the role of lawyers. The use of human rights rhetoric as a tool of promoting political and economic interests contradicted the human rights concept itself. Unilateral measures taken towards a sovereign country would discredit the principle of participation of the international community in ensuring the observation of human rights.
Mr. Latypov was concerned about international terrorism, and urged the world to act on the Vienna Declaration and the Programme of Action and take steps against terrorism. He recommended the establishment of a functional commission of the Economic and Social Council on the issue. Belarus's reservation to Article 20 of the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment would be lifted, and the second reading of the law on the Ombudsman was under way in the Belarusian Parliament. Political reform was also progressing. For example, the Electoral Code had been produced in cooperation with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Council of Europe.
GEORGE CHIKOTY, Deputy Minister of External Relations of Angola, said that his country had been a systematic victim of armed aggression and destabilization provoked by external agents from the time of the apartheid regime in South Africa up to the full independence of Angola. The aggression had destroyed a major part of the country's infrastructure, caused the death of thousands of people, mutilated victims of war and resulted in more than a million internally displaced persons.
With the end of the Cold War, Mr. Chikoty continued, the Angolan Government started a whole set of actions with the aim of pacifying the country and reconciling all Angolans. This had led to holding the first democratic elections involving the whole population, including Jonas Savimbi's UNITA. Due to outside incitement from some countries and persons, and despite the relevant United Nations resolutions, UNITA did not accept the results of those elections, preferring to return to war with the hope of taking power by the force of weapons. Since then, Angola was once more experiencing a war situation that had already caused around 3 million internal refugees who lived on humanitarian emergency aid. This was in addition to the 2 million dead and more than 100,000 people mutilated in the conflict.
Mr. Chikoty said that his Government believed that issues relating to the promotion of fundamental rights and liberties were particularly important. Angola was developing a vast programme of cooperation with the United Nations, which had enabled it, among many other things, to accelerate the process of incorporating international human rights standards into its internal legal system. The democratic process under way was far-reaching and irreversible, and in it Angola could highlight the consolidation and recognition of fundamental rights and liberties of citizens, national unity and reconciliation between Angolans.
PETER HAIN, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, said that while the international slave trade had become a dark chapter of the world's history, contemporary forms of slavery still persisted. In too many countries slavery, bonded labour, forced prostitution and other forms of abusive labour continued, with the victims being poor and weak, without power or resources and often without a political voice. Women and children were
particularly vulnerable, becoming targets for traffickers and serious physical and psychological abuse. Children also suffered from abusive labour practices. Over 250 million children were engaged in child labour, some no more than four years old. It was vital that the new International Labour Office Convention 182 on the worst forms of child labour enter into force as soon as possible.
Whilst hundreds of millions grew ever richer, some 1.3 million people - two thirds of them women - had no access to adequate food, water, sanitation, essential health care or primary education. Around 35,000 young children died each day because of preventable diseases. The benefits of globalization needed to be equitable and sustainable. A fundamental step was the removal of debt burden. Too many poor countries had been forced for too long to spend millions more on their debt interest payment than they were able to invest in the young, the sick, the undernourished and the poor. Britain had therefore removed all bilateral debts owned to the United Kingdom by the 41 Heavily Indebted Countries. The benefits of debt relief should be used to make education a priority in the developing world. Although Britain had increased its overseas development assistance, there had been a world wide drop in such aid.
Mr. Hain said there was still too much oppression and denial of human rights across the world, as recent events in Chechnya and China demonstrated, but there had been important progress too in Central and Eastern Europe, in Latin America and in Africa, where democracy continued to emerge. Dialogue with the UN institutions, and not just within UN fora, was central to building mutual respect and understanding. In this context, it was hard to understand why so many requests for visits by UN Special Rapporteurs went unanswered.
CHARLES JOSSELIN, Minister Delegate for Cooperation and Francophonie of France, hoped this session would serve not only as a forum for pious wishes but to re-assert equality, democracy, peace and humanism. The World Conference against Racism would be an opportunity to address human rights violations, as would the conference on racism to be held in Strasbourg in October. He commended the work done by the Commission and people in the field and drew particular attention to non-governmental organizations as the best messengers of the indignities suffered around the world by civil societies.
Mr. Josselin questioned whether the cause of human rights has progressed since last year. The world was in a state of far-reaching change due to globalization and the uniformization of economic models. There were many historic, cultural and religious differences in the world, however this should not prevent the Commission from reaching a common ground. France saw China's signing of the two Conventions of 1966 on political and civil rights, and economic, social and cultural rights, as a positive sign. France recommended that China end the repression of dissidents, abolish capital punishment and remove the restrictions on freedom of association.
French public opinion was shocked by the testimonies from Chechnya and expected an independent investigation on this issue. France urged the Russian Federation for a cease-fire. Mr. Josselin said Russia should aim at a democratic and peaceful future and should avoid military solutions. The political context had to promote peace. He commended the positive reports from Croatia and Senegal and their political stability and peaceful elections, and hoped the same for Indonesia.
Those responsible for human rights violations should be held accountable, Mr. Josselin said. France had ratified the convention concerning the International Criminal Court. France had adopted laws on equality between men and women. Capital punishment was condemned as opposing the work of the Commission and France appealed for its abolishment. The right to subsistence and dignity had to be protected. Better treatment of the debt problem was encouraged. No rights should be neglected and political and civil rights were as important as economic, social and cultural rights.
PAL CSAKY, Deputy Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic for Human Rights, Minorities and Regional Development, said the end of history, envisaged by some after the fall of the Berlin Wall, turned out to be just another illusion. The new multi-polar world was facing major problems, including hardly manageable internal conflicts of ethnic, tribal or religious problems, alarming rates of poverty in some developing countries, and humanitarian disasters caused by nature and by men. On the other hand, the challenges of economic globalization and the revolution of the information technologies had to be met.
Still, it was undeniable that considerable progress had been achieved in the field of the enhancement of human rights mechanisms and instruments. One of the most important developments in the field of human rights was the ever spreading acceptance by the international community of the concept that violations of human rights and disrespect for human dignity could not be justified by the notion of national sovereignty. Slovakia had followed with deep regret and anxiety the situation in the former Yugoslavia. The situation in Kosovo was far from being settled as animosities rooted in long-lasting discrimination were very difficult to overcome. In this context, Slovakia welcomed the considerable progress towards lasting peace in the Middle East.
Slovakia had abolished the death penalty and valued highly the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination and Intolerance which would be held next year in South Africa. Slovakia had also committed itself to building a tolerant society and creating equal opportunities for all its citizens. It did its best to integrate the Roma community into the society and at the same time to respect their ethnic traditions and human rights.
SIPHO M. PITYANA, Director-General of the Department of Foreign Affairs of South Africa, said that South Africa had, since its return to the United Nations in 1994, established a democratic constitutional State and institutions to protect democracy. These institutions included the National Human Rights Commission, an independent judiciary, the Office of the Auditor General, the Office of the Public Protector and others. He thanked the Commission for the two conventions elaborated by the Commission which had helped to end apartheid, the Convention against Apartheid and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. This was the background to South Africa accepting to host the Third World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in 2001. In hosting the Conference, South Africa hoped that with the help of other Governments and NGOs, practical outcomes to the objectives laid down by the General Assembly would be achieved. Mr. Pityana appealed to the delegations to assist South Africa with financial resources for the Conference.
As Chair of the Non-Aligned Movement, South Africa hoped the Commission could forge a consensus on the right to development ahead of the first session of the working group. He urged the Commission to remove obstacles to the implementation of the right to development, promote national development planning based on human rights norms, encourage national human rights action plans to integrate all human rights, call on national institutions to incorporate the right to development into their mandates, and promote human rights education as a link between human rights and development.
Mr. Pityana was concerned about the failure of the Commission to fully implement the Declaration of Human Rights Defenders. His country would assist in the establishment of a new mechanism to ensure the implementation of the Declaration. South Africa had over the past year presented its first periodic report under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and it welcomed the adoption of the two optional protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, particularly the agreement to raise the minimum age for the participation of child soldiers in armed conflicts.
LEGWAILA LEGWAILA (Botswana) said the right to self-determination had long been accepted as an immutable right for all peoples. Botswana had always supported the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and would continue to do so as long as their yearning for a homeland of their own remained unfulfilled. The current peace process was a labourious one and was frustratingly characterized by a lack of predictability. It was prone to interminable stalemates and periodic spasms of doom and hopelessness.
Botswana believed that self-determination for the Palestinians could not be achieved or if achieved could not be sustained as long as Israel remained a veritable endangered species in the Middle East, with some of its neighbours still implacably sworn to the total annihilation of the Jewish State. A tit-for-tat culture of violence could never solve the Middle East problem.
Israel would never find peace and security at the expense of the freedom and peace of the Palestinian people. The right of the Jewish nation or people to self-determination, to a country or homeland of their own, could not supersede the right of the Palestinian people to have a country or home land of their own. The two parties had achieved a great deal to date and they deserved the support of the international community in their arduous struggle for peace and reconciliation in one of the most dangerous areas of our troubled world. True peace however could be achieved only with a regional accommodation between Israel and the Arab world, including a peaceful settlement of the Golan problem and the occupation by Israel of southern Lebanon.
JORGE FERRER RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said that although colonialism had been abolished as a system, new developments were taking place, particularly against developing States. New political domination was imposed against them in the form of rights and humanitarian interventions. Foreign political models were imposed as universal values. Self-determination was the inalienable right of people to establish and organize their political system, decide on their economic, social and cultural development, and decide on the use of their natural resources.
The international community should reject any interpretation of self-determination other than that of the Charter of the United Nations and other related decisions and resolutions by UN organs. Cuba wanted the reintegration of its territory of Guantnamo which was illegally occupied by a North American naval base. The continued occupation was against the independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of Cuba, and most particularly it was a flagrant violation of the right to self-determination of the Cuban people. In addition, Cuba welcomed the report of the Special Rapporteur on the use of mercenaries. During the last 40 years, Cuba had been a victim of mercenary activities, promoted and financed with impunity from the United States, with the tolerance of the authorities there.
NABIL RAMLAWI (Palestine) said Israel killed human beings, dispossessing them of their rights and violating the very principles which formed the basis of democracy. Israel continued to occupy the Palestinian territory and this foreign occupation could not be justified since it constituted, according to the international community and international public law, an aggression and a crime disturbing the peace and security of humanity. It should be unconditionally terminated. It could not be allowed for only one part of the UN Partition Resolution to be admitted while the other one was ignored. The official borders of Israel were those delineated in the partition plan and the presence of Israelis outside those borders was an illegal and unacceptable occupation.
The core of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict had always been the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people who had lived in Palestine for thousands of years. The United Nations General Assembly had examined this issue since 1947 and adopted successive resolutions, all of which affirmed the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people. The international community stood today helpless in front of the implementation of its will in connection with the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people. This was due to the policy of selectivity and double standards which characterized the implementation of the principles of international law, reflecting the weakness and helplessness of the international community in giving effect to its resolutions in the face of the practices of aggression and occupation that Israel persisted on. These aggressions included expansion of existing settlements and establishment of new ones on Palestinian land, denial of the right to return and the refusal of the right of the Palestinian people to establish their independent and sovereign Palestinian State.
FAYZA ABOULNAGA (Egypt) said the right to self-determination was one of the pillars of the international system as embodied in the UN Charter, without which one could not speak of human rights. All rights were directly affected by the right to self-determination. The Palestinian people were still fighting for the right to self-determination and Israeli behaviour continued. The recent vote by the European Union on the need to recognize the right of the Palestinian people to the right to self-determination showed that it was time for Israel to end the occupation.
Egypt appealed to the United Nations, specialized agencies and the Commission to play their role in assisting the Palestinian people, and to make Israel fulfill its international obligations, respect the principle of land for peace and honour the commitments and promises it has made. It was time the Palestinians had a free sovereign State. Egypt was promoting peace in the region, living up to its international obligations and respecting human rights. Egypt hoped the impending meeting between President Bill Clinton of the United States and President Hafez Assad of Syria would move the peace process forward. Egypt awaited the application of promises made long ago.
CHEIKH FAHAD AWAIDA AL-THANI (Qatar) said the continued occupation of the Palestinian land by Israel was a violation of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people. The occupation, which included Jerusalem, was against the universally accepted principle of self-determination. Israel had to abide by the Madrid Accords which advocated the exchange of land for peace. Without a real peace process and agreement in the region, there would be no lasting peace. Israel had to respect the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people.
MOHAMED YAHYA OULD SIDI HAIBA (Mauritania) said the right of people to self-determination was enshrined in the UN Charter and was the basis for human rights to be properly achieved. The Palestinian people had not had this opportunity and had been denied this fundamental right. The peace talks were commended and hopes were expressed as to the speeding up of the peace process. It was time for the Paestinian people to enjoy the right to self-determination. The discussion under agenda item 5 reminded the Commission of the importance of establishing a lasting peace in the region in accordance with international law. The Commission was recommended to continue to give priority to the establishment of the national rights of the Palestinian people and to promote justice, equlity and stability in the region.
MOHAMED SALAH DEMBRI (Algeria) regretted that the right to self-determination was still on the working agenda and that people were still denied this fundamental right. Therefore there had to be a stronger commitment to self-determination by the international community. The Palestinian people were one of the last peoples waiting to have access to this right, as Pope Jean-Paul II stated yesterday. Algeria urged the Commission to accept no more delaying tactics preventing Palestinians from the exercise of this right. Algeria hoped that this situation would improve in keeping with international legality, and would result in a sovereign, independent Palestinian State. History had shown that waiting for people to give up the right to self-determination was the wrong answer to the right question.
SHEHAB MADI (Jordan) said the right of people under alien occupation to self-determination was enshrined in the first article of the UN Charter. For many decades, the Palestinian people had been deprived of this fundamental right under Israeli occupation. Severe and systematic violation of this basic human right among many others was coupled by disregard of human rights instruments as well as international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions. Nine years had passed since peace talks were boldly launched in Madrid setting a clear and hopeful vision for the region. Today, these talks seemed to timidly stagger and limp their way on amid the many blows and setbacks which were mainly due to extremist elements from both sides of the divide who tried to impose their own agendas of violence and hatred in the region.
Israeli commitment to the implementation of the peace accords was the only guarantee for a durable and secure peace. Respect of deadlines was of utmost importance. Without addressing the root causes of the conflict on the basis of equality, justice and respect of each other's right, and without fully implementing accords, there would be no real peace. Continuing unilateral actions and settlement building polices aimed at changing the status quo in the occupied territories, particularly of Jerusalem, would not help. Denying the fundamental right of Palestinian people to self-determination on their own soil as well as their right to the establishment of their own independent State on this soil would not help either.
KAREN NAZARIAN (Armenia) said that the right to self-determination constituted one of the major principles of international law on which rested the community of democratic States as well as the United Nations. Throughout history, nations had exercised their fundamental right to self-determination over and over again. Attempts to curtail or deny the multiple implementation of that right by limiting it to only one-time enjoyment should be considered a gross violation of human rights. To stop the exercise of that right and the right to forge one's national destiny independently would lead to armed conflict, aggression, destruction, and refugee and migration problems. It would also raise regional unrest and turbulence and threaten the security of neighbouring States. Those acts constituted unacceptable violations of human rights. Armenia defended and pursued the full implementation of peoples' rights to self-determination through peaceful means. It actively supported all legal claims and efforts in that respect in other parts of the globe.
TOFIG MUSAYEV (Azerbaijan) said the right to self-determination played a part in realizing other human rights by providing the general framework and foundation for the implementation andpromotion of human rights. The right to self-determination had been incorporated in international instruments but it was not meant to encourage secessionist movements or foreign interference and aggression. This right had to contribute to safeguarding the political independence and territorial integrity of States, ensuring non-interference in internal affairs and promoting international cooperation. The right to self-determination should not be used as justification for territorial expansionism under the pretext of care for ethnic groups in other States. The Republic of Armenia was still proclaiming the cause of the conflict between the two States as 'the strife for self-determination of the Armenian community in the Nagorno-Karabakh region of the Republic of Azerbaijan'. Azerbaijan could serve as an example to the opinion that in order to avoid bloody conflict, the international community had to be careful about every case of proclamation of the exercise of the right to self-determination and distinguish self-determination from aggression.
NAJAT AL HAJJAJI (Libya) said the beginning of the nineties saw a new concept of humanitarian interventions. These selective interventions demonstrated that the major powers sought only to expand their power, while having no interest in protecting human rights. In the shadow of globalization, which destroyed all barriers, certain countries were taking advantage of the weakness of other countries. Intervention under the pretext of protecting human rights amounted to a flagrant violation of human rights and the UN Charter. The countries carrying out these interventions were trying to sap the very foundations of human rights in an attempt to Balkanise the world. The principle of national sovereignty and of independence was thus being violated. Weak countries did not want to depend on the whims of certain States which interfered in their internal affairs under the pretext of international law.
MAQBOOL AHMAD, of the World Muslim Congress, said that the Chechen people, having their own distinct identity, culture, religion and language, were initially colonized in the middle of the nineteenth century through brutal conquest. Their lands were confiscated and distributed to Russian settlers. Chechens had been made to suffer injustice and humilation. They had never been given the option to freely choose the kind of relationship with Russia they would find acceptable. In addition, the people of Palestine had a right to their own independent State in implementation of their right to self-determination. In their bid to attain nationhood and vacant alien occupation, Palestinians needed support and understanding of all freedom- loving people. In Kashmir, since 1989, the Indian army had killed 60,000 Kashmiris. Kashmir also had the right to self-determination.
JACQUELINE HERRERA, of the Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru, said that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) campaign in Kosovo had been a brutal war led by one military power, namely the United States. The air campaign caused indiscriminate deaths and great material damage. In 80 days, NATO had carried out 35,7888 combat operations. NATO and the United States had the obligation to compensate victims, among whom were vast numbers of refugees seeking refuge from the bombing campaign. The intervention, which amounted to a gross violation of human rights, the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions, constituted a crime against humanity. Furthermore, it did not have the approval of the UN Security Council, which according to article 24 of the UN Charter, held primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. The NATO attach set a dangerous precedent regarding intervention in conflicts.
****