Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Commission on Human Rights
Default title
06 April 2000
Share
Commission on Human Rights
56th session
6 April 2000
Afternoon
The Commission on Human Rights this afternoon continued to discuss the subject of civil and political rights, an agenda item that includes such matters as torture and detention; disappearances; summary executions; freedom of expression; independence of the judiciary, administration of justice, and impunity; religious intolerance; states of emergency; and conscientious objection to military service.
As in the previous two days of debate, statements by national delegations were predominantly descriptions of Government efforts to protect and enhance civil and political rights -- and also occasionally defences against allegations lodged by other countries and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
A representative of China, for example, charged that the United States and a handful of other countries had interfered unwarrantedly in China's judicial affairs by labelling the lawful punishment of criminal activities as violations of human rights. Such interference could not but show that such countries' so-called defense of judicial independence and fairness was bogus and their concern for human rights was phony, he said.
Tunisia contended that a visit of the Commission's Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression had resulted in a report that did not give sufficient attention to Tunisian achievements in such areas as the advancement of pluralism, tolerance, and women's rights, and that the report contained passages that seemed to be long quotations of distortions or lies from various biased NGOs on topics that had not been raised directly by the Special Rapporteur with the Tunisian Government.
And the Sudanese Government said it firmly respected human rights and opposed religious intolerance and wished the international community would take note of that and would recognize efforts made to better human rights in the country.
Addressing the afternoon meeting were representatives of Cuba, Nigeria, China, Lebanon, Sri Lanka, the Republic of Korea, Tunisia, India, Sudan, Malaysia, Uruguay, Iran, Switzerland, Ireland, Kazakhstan, Israel, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Algeria, Turkey, and Cyprus.
Iraq, Sudan, Yemen, China, Malaysia, Viet Nam, Turkey, Cyprus, and Nigeria spoke in exercise of the right of reply.
The Commission continued its review of civil and political rights in an evening session scheduled to adjourn as late as midnight.
Statements
MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ (Cuba) said the Commission's crisis in methods of work was more and more apparent every year when this agenda item came up. This year there were no less than 14 different subjects under this agenda item; no fewer than 76 documents with a total of 1,117 pages had been filed. Some reports had come in late. And of course it was likely that draft resolutions under this agenda item would come from the usual small group of countries and would be negotiated in unruly meetings at the last minute in small, crowded rooms where there would not be enough seats for everyone.
Who benefited from this deplorable situation? It was obvious that with the scanty resources that countries of the south had to cope with this avalanche of material on a very important subject, they had a hard time giving it the attention it deserved. Meanwhile, it was clear from debate and Commission activities so far that the powerful countries of the world considered that economic, social and cultural rights were a problem in the south, but not in the north. Last year, for example, of 101 urgent appeals directed to 39 Governments by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, only three Governments -- Belarus, ex-Yugoslavia, and Turkey -- were European; and among 36 opinions issued by the group, only three dealt with countries of the north.
P. D. COLE (Nigeria) recalled that his country, only a few years ago, had been brought under the intense searchlight of the Commission for various violations of human rights perpetuated by one of the worst regimes of Nigeria. Suffice to say that enormous damage had been done to Nigerians and to the nation. Having travelled down that road, Nigeria was now determined not to allow that regrettable experience to befall it again. The international community had been of great assistance in overcoming the human rights problems in Nigeria.
The principles of democracy, the respect for the rule of law, transparency, accountability and good governance had now been embraced by the present Government of President Obasanjo, who was himself a victim of the naked repression which occurred during the dark days of Nigeria's history. The adoption of democracy as a philosophy of governance, after one and half decades of almost uninterrupted military dictatorship in Nigeria had, no doubt, advanced the cause of the citizens's civil and political rights. The phenomenon of bribery and corruption had already been identified and condemned as pernicious violations of the rights of the people by the privileged few who abused public trust.
LI BAODONG (China) said his Government attached great importance to the promotion and protection of civil and political rights, and the achievements in that regard had been widely acknowledged. In March last year, the concept of running the country in accordance with the law was formally incorporated into the country's Constitution. The Chinese society was now in the process of transition from too much emphasis on the rule of person and insufficient emphasis on the rule of law to establishing the concept of the rule of law, and from supremacy of the power to supremacy of the law.
In recent years, the National People's Congress and its Standing Committee had adopted a series of important laws, including the Law on Prison, the Law on Judges and the Law on Layers. The judicial body had moved ahead with comprehensive reform to further enhance the fair administration of justice and to upgrade the level of law enforcement. In addition, the Chinese Constitution provided that the citizens enjoyed the freedom of religious belief. At present, there were more than 85,000 sites for religious activities in China, more than 300,000 clergy and more than 3,000 religious organizations. Concerning the prohibition of torture, China explicitly prohibited torture and meted out severe punishment against the use of it. It had also made great efforts to strengthen the legal system and develop democracy. Remarkable achievements had thus been scored in promoting and protecting all civil and political rights.
The United States and a handful of other countries had interfered unwarrantedly in China's judicial affairs by labelling the lawful punishment of criminal activities as violations of human rights. Such interference could not but show that such countries' so-called defense of judicial independence and fairness was bogus and their concern for human rights was phony.
The Chinese achievements were acknowledged by any one free of bias and certainly could not be negated by the United States and other western countries or a handful of non-governmental organizations through their lies. In the United States, deplorable human rights violations were taking place with serious racial discrimination against the blacks and the coloured. That country ranked first in the world in the proportion of prisoners among its population. The self-proclaimed democracy of the United States had always served the interests of a small number of wealthy people.
WALID NASR (Lebanon) said that in a small town in southern Lebanon, there was a detention camp where violations of civil and political rights occurred continually. The responsibility for the camp and for the violations rested with Israel; Israel had occupied the land, detained the detainees within, and Israeli police ran the operation. Some 140 persons were held there, including teenagers and elderly Lebanese. There were cases of whole families being detained there.
All were held arbitrarily, were not charged and were not tried. They were subjected to torture in various forms, including electric shocks and the pulling out of hair. Isolation was the norm; family visits were not allowed. Medical care was not provided, and so the health condition of the detainees was poor; the medical problems of some who had subsequently been released had included fractured skulls and other broken bones. Over 30 Lebanese detainees also were held in camps inside Israel, and they suffered similar treatment. The Commission must call for an end to these human-rights violations by Israel.
YASANTHA KODAGODA (Sri Lanka) said those who committed indiscriminate violence, assassinated political leaders, and murdered peace makers and human-rights defenders should not be recognized as "liberation fighters" but should be condemned as terrorists. The world community had a duty to develop measures to deal effectively with this major form of violation of human rights. Lacuna in the law should not provide a pretext for terrorists to use suicide bombers and advanced technology to destroy democratic society and the political framework of governance.
Governments such as that of Sri Lanka which were faced with terrorism would be encouraged if the international community took a more vibrant, progressive, pragmatic and functional role in battling against non-State entities which took part in terrorist activities. Non-governmental organizations, for their part, did valuable work but Sri Lanka felt concern that the interest shown by NGOs with regard to serious violations of human rights committed by terrorist groups was less than adequate. Sri Lanka had suffered immensely from terrorism -- had lost democratically elected officials to assassination, had had tens of thousands of innocent civilians killed, and had sustained economic damage beyond calculation. More really had to be done by the Commission and international community.
CHANG MAN SOON (the Republic of Korea) said his delegation could not fail to observe the stark reality that human rights violations around the world showed no signs of abating. Gross violations of human rights such as enforced and involuntary disappearances, arbitrary detentions and torture were still prevalent in many parts of the world. This situation called for more assertive efforts by the international community and political will from the Governments concerned. It would be timely and appropriate for the Commission to discuss ways and means of ensuring the effective implementation of the UN Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. Another form of gross human rights violation, namely torture, still persisted in many corners of the world and the Commission should spare no effort to facilitate progress on the work on the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture.
The role of the non-governmental organizations and the media in the common fight against torture was emphasized. The Korean Government had continued its efforts to improve its own mechanisms to safeguard human rights and to better guarantee civil and political rights. Foremost in efforts was the establishment of the National Human Rights Commission.
MOHAMED LESSIR (Tunisia) said debates on civil and political rights should be marked more by cooperation and should go beyond sterile debate and confrontation. Democracy and development and human rights were interdependent and mutually reinforcing. The promotion and daily practice of democracy depended on disseminating a human-rights culture, activities based on tolerance, and conduct of affairs based on the rule of law. Societies which had had hierarchical structures and non-democratic histories faced difficulties in establishing democracy, however there was little previous experience. The process was delicate.
Tunisia was seeking to establish a society based on human rights, tolerance, and solidarity. It also took into account historical and sociological realities in Tunisia -- it sought progress but also placed emphasis on stability. Reforms had been carried out progressively, year after year, to solidly establish a framework of democracy in Tunisia. Efforts were being made to avoid all forms of extremism, including through modification of laws and the national electoral code, which had been altered to ensure the presence of opposition parties in the Government.
SAVITRI KUNADI (India) said the phenomenon of terrorism posed one of the most serious threats to human rights. India believed that there was an urgent need for a comprehensive study on the impact of terrorism on the enjoyment of human rights. This was important as acts of terrorism had continued and were indeed on the increase. However, the debate on terrorism and its impact on human rights remained inconclusive partly because of genuine conceptual inadequacies and also because of the misleading propaganda of the State and non-State actors who sought to conceal their self-serving violent agenda behind lofty principles such as self-determination and freedom struggle.
Terrorism was totally at odds with a democratic and liberal society which allowed for the free expression of all shades of opinion and also for expression of dissent by non-violent and peaceful methods. There was also an urgent need to ensure the accountability of non-State actors who perpetrated terrorist acts and were increasingly responsible for massive abuses of human rights. India did not agree with those who maintained that it was only States that violated human rights. Organized terrorism prompted by certain States as an instrument of foreign policy was very different in scale, nature and consequences from actions of individuals and groups. India had been the victim of some of the most brutal manifestations of terrorism aided and abetted from across the border by a neighbouring country that had all along nurtured territorial ambitions on the India State of Jammu and Kashmir. The proxy war and this country's sponsorship of state terrorism for more than a decade had been responsible for gross violations of human rights by terrorists. Having itself been a victim of terrorism and fully realising the grave danger posed by it to enjoyment of all human rights, India was keen to promote the efforts of the international community to develop a common approach to combat terrorism.
In conclusion, the representative said she regretted the sweeping conclusions reached by the Special Rapporteur on religious intolerance concerning certain incidents of violence against members of a religious minority in India. India had sent a detailed response. The Indian Constitution guaranteed the freedom of religious belief and prohibited all forms of religious discrimination.
HASSAN EL TALIB (Sudan) said a number of steps had been taken to bolster civil and political rights in his country, including establishment of an Advisory Council for Human Rights in 1994; the release of all those accused of terrorist attacks in the bombing in Khartoum of July 1998; the amendment of the National Security Act to bring it into line with international standards; and the signing of an accord for technical assistance with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on 29 March 2000.
In Sudan the judiciary was independent, separation of powers was observed, and a Constitutional Court had recently been established. Social and religious tolerance was instinctive in Sudanese society; religious intolerance was outlawed by the Constitution; the southern states of the Republic had been exempted from Shari'a law; and new churches were regularly licensed and built. The Government wished that the international community would take note of this approach and this prevailing attitude of tolerance and respect for human rights in Sudan.
HAMIDON ALI (Malaysia) regretted when Governments, in making pronouncements on the situation of rights in other countries, failed to see both sides of the equation, concentrating only on the rights, without attention to responsibilities and the rule of law. The pious pronouncement by one delegation on the alleged repression of the freedom of opinion and of peaceful assembly in Malaysia was a case in point. For the sake of clarification, the delegation felt compelled to say that given the difficulties which Malaysia had faced at the outset of independence, namely the challenge of a multi-ethnic society and an economy based on the export of commodities, Malaysia had been written off as a country with few prospects for the future. Currently, while not obscenely rich as the perpetrators of pious pronouncements might be, Malaysia was not dirt poor. It could not have done this without democracy and sound socio-economic policies.
Concerning developments pertaining to the suit filed against the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the Government was distributing its views in an annex. However, Malaysia wished to say that the Special Rapporteur's report, while it purported to be factual, had a somewhat misleading, intentionally or otherwise, statement of facts which tended towards adverse inferences being made against the intentions or actions of the Government.
CARLOS SGARBI (Uruguay) stressed the importance of the respect for human rights. It was the responsibility of both States and the international community to promote and protect all human rights. States must play the role of both protector and guarantor through developing internal laws and regulations. States also had to take appropriate steps to stop all human rights violations. The international community had to come up with international mechanisms and laws to help protect human rights. Uruguay condemned all forms of violations of human rights which affected the right to life and supported the work of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial and summary executions. There was a need for effective mechanisms against torture and Uruguay would work with the Working Group on this.
The international community should be able to make progressive development in order to stop violations like summary executions, torture and forced disappearances. The Commission was encouraged to consider in detail the draft international convention on forced disappearances. At the outset of the new millennium, freedom of expression and belief should be enjoyed by all.
SEYED REZVANI (Iran) said that the democratization process in the country was marching forward on the solid foundation of democratic Islamic principles; the cornerstones of Iranian reforms were the promotion and protection of Constitutional liberties; upholding the rule of law; strengthening democratic norms and institutions; institutionalization of a culture of participation; full accountability of public officials; increasing transparency; strengthening of the institutions of civil society; promotion of tolerance and pluralism; confidence building; and the breaking of old barriers in foreign relations.
Democracies by definition were susceptible to dissention and rivalries; the approach taken by Iran was to promote and protect democratic values, ensure the rule of law and due process, and ensure security and stability. Freedom of expression and the press had been greatly enhanced recently -- in the past two and a half years, more than 400 new publications had been added to the Iranian press.
JEAN-DANIEL VIGNY (Switzerland) said the draft optional protocol to the Convention against Torture was an international preventive instrument which should be adopted by the Commission. Switzerland was encouraged with the work of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions and hoped that countries would continue to cooperate with it and respond to its recommendations. Switzerland hoped that Nepal and Viet Nam would continue to cooperate with the Working Group as Bhutan and China had done. Switzerland also believed that the Working Group was justified in sending urgent communications to Israel for its actions in the Al-Khiam prison in southern Lebanon. The Working Group had been able to visit Indonesia and East Timor in 1999, but unfortunately, it had not been able to visit Bahrain. The Working Group planned trips to Australia and Belarus this year.
Switzerland was worried that there had been 50,000 forced disappearances in the past decade in 70 countries and the Working Group's report stated that such disappearances continued in regions around the world. This was a most serious violation. It required appropriate response from the international community. Switzerland wondered if the existing mechanisms were sufficient to fight this scourge and asked if the draft International Convention for the Protection of all Persons Against Forced Disappearances which was adopted by the Subcommission on Promotion and Protection of Human Rights could not be studied in depth by the Commission. It suggested that an independent expert be named to revise the draft Convention, taking into consideration the views of countries, non-governmental organizations and the Working Group on Forced Disappearances.
In conclusion, Switzerland believed that the report of the Special Rapporteur against extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions reflected the gravity of this problem in the world. Switzerland urged States to cooperate individually and internationally in order to end these violations.
ANNE ANDERSON (Ireland) said her country supported the Special Rapporteur on independence of judges and lawyers in his call for an independent judicial inquiry into the murder of well-regarded Belfast lawyer Patrick Finucane more than 10 years ago, and shared the concern about allegations of collusion by security forces in Northern Ireland in this murder. The murder and the grave allegations arising from it had undermined confidence in the rule of law in Northern Ireland. Similarly, the murder of Rosemary Nelson in 1999 was a matter of great concern to the Irish Government, which had repeatedly said that the investigation into the murder must be thorough, transparent, and independent.
Ireland also supported the work of the Special Rapporteur on religious intolerance and was concerned about systematic persecution, torture, murder, and discrimination based on religious intolerance that was occurring around the world. Groups such as the Baha'i community in Iran and the people of Tibet must be free of religious persecution. Ireland would introduce a draft resolution on the implementation of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance based on Religion or Belief.
ERIK ZHUSSUPOV (Kazakhstan) said the debate on the protection of human rights in his country was developing and the Government was carrying out steps to develop civil society and to set up mechanisms to promote and protect all rights. Kazakhstan believed in the right of freedom of expression and in equality regardless of race, colour, religion or other factors. One of the conditions for realizing all human rights in Kazakhstan was the existence of international harmony, international stability, and the internal political and economic situation in the country. Kazakhstan was constantly developing the formation of its civil society. Standard setting was important and it was necessary to ensure basic international human rights.
Kazakhstan was party to various international human rights conventions. The situation in the country was changing for the better. Kazakhstan's Head of Government had decreed that the activities of law enforcement bodies should defend the interests of the State and should ensure that violations of human rights were not carried out and the rights of citizens were guaranteed. This was being implemented.
ADY SCHONMANN (Israel) said a controversial issue was the need for Governments and policy-makers to guarantee the right to free speech while combatting incitement to violence and other manifestations of hate speech. Israel today faced crucial and controversial questions that led to very heated debate; in general, laws and Government policy favoured free speech, but still incitement to racism and violence had long been prohibited.
Following the assassination of Prime Minister Yizhak Rabin, Israel had placed increased emphasis on combatting racism and incitement, among other things establishing a special team in the State Attorney's Office to monitor and enforce the law in these cases.
Tragically, manifestations of racism, anti-Semitism and hate speech continued to be pervasive on a large scale in today's world. In some parts of Europe this phenomenon was reaching worrisome levels. In the context of the Middle East peace process, Israel was not immune to the phenomenon -- just when intensive efforts were being made to advance peace negotiations, there was an unprecedented and orchestrated increase in inflammatory and hateful rhetoric, anti-Semitism, and holocaust denial, in several Arab countries, including those party to current negotiations with Israel. Such propaganda was often articulated and inspired by official sources and media to win public support to frustrate any step towards normalizing relations with Israel.
LUIS ZUNIGA (Nicaragua) said his country had suffered under a lengthily dictatorship and there had been many violations of civil and political rights. But thanks to the constant struggle of the people, the present Government continued to consolidate its protection and promotion of democracy and human rights, including the freedom of speech and expression. Economic success and development of any country depended on the quality of the Government of that country. Wherever there was an integral visions of human rights - all rights civil and political, and economic, social and cultural -- these countries enjoyed great advances in their development.
There was freedom of expression in Nicaragua under the present regime and under no time or any circumstances was it being violated. Nicaragua, having been a victim of the violation of civil and political rights in the past, urged the international community to continue to work to uphold all human rights, including civil and political rights.
NORA RUIZ DE ANGULO (Costa Rica) said the Commission Bureau and regional groups should seek a way of revising this agenda item so that it was not so broad and unworkable. Costa Rica had long believed in and acted for enhancement of civil and political rights, nationally, regionally, and internationally. Much had been done by the country through the Inter-American system. It was hoped there would soon be a permanent Inter-American Court that could consider human-rights complaints, as proposed by Costa Rica.
Costa Rica also had first suggested the draft optional protocol to the Convention against Torture, which would authorize visits to places of detention. The intent of the protocol was not to punish but to prevent; the point was not to add another judicial body investigating violations but to better involve experts in efforts to create situations that would reduce opportunities for carrying out torture. The draft protocol would be innovative and, Costa Rica felt, effective. It was part of the search for new strategies recommended by the High Commissioner for Human Rights and aimed at establishing preventive and early warning mechanisms. Costa Rica hoped a definitive text could soon be reached on the optional protocol.
MOHAMED EL AMINE (Algeria) said that in 1999, his country had held its second pluralistic presidential election with 7 candidates. Preceding the election was an electoral campaign which had been proved to be absolutely free. The new President had highlighted the need to create conditions for the rapid return to civil peace, to consolidate a state of law and to uphold civil and political rights and all human rights. At the political level, the Government had adopted a civil reconciliation agreement and the Supreme Judge
had issued an amnesty for many persons, including those condemned for subversion and terrorism. They had been freed. Given the importance of the judiciary, there was a thorough reform of the judiciary being carried out by an independent national commission. Algeria wished to have a proper dialogue with all international human rights mechanisms and wished to highlight the visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross and the European Troika which had been given free access.
BULENT MERIC (Turkey) said terrorism, which aimed at destabilizing legitimately constituted democratic Governments and undermining civil society and the rule of law, presented a major challenge which the international community must combat in concert. No nation was immune, and while terrorism might stem from different causes, such as ethnic, ideological or religious grievances, it had no justification. All necessary and effective measures must be taken against it in accordance with international law.
Turkey shared the opinion that terrorism was not only a criminal phenomenon and that it had a major impact on human rights. It was often argued that only States could commit human-rights violations and that what terrorists did was only a form of crime. In Turkey's view that argument did not carry much weight considering what actually was happening all over the globe. Such an approach to terrorism was erroneous and even incited terrorism. Turkey stressed that States must abide by the UN Charter and not provide safe haven to terrorists. Turkey and like-minded countries would present a new draft resolution this year on the matter of terrorism and its effect on human rights.
PETROS EFTYCHIOU (Cyprus) said disappearances constituted a multiple violation of basic and fundamental norms and principles of human rights. Disappearances continued to take place in various parts of the world. In Cyprus too, the families of the missing persons who disappeared during and after the Turkish invasion in 1974 were still waiting to learn in a conclusive manner whether their loved ones were alive or dead. Cyprus appealed to all concerned, especially to Turkey, to exhibit a humanitarian and a political will in order to help and assist these efforts. It was very tragic that despite efforts no progress had been achieved.
Another grievous aspect of the Cyprus problem was that of the systematic destruction of Cyprus’ cultural heritage. The list of archaeological sites and museums as well as private collections that had been plundered and destroyed in the occupied area was infinite. Turkey, a contracting party to the 1954 Hague Convention had failed to abide by, and respect its contractual obligations and had persistently acted contrary to the provisions of pertinent international instruments. Continues an systematic plundering of the religious, historical and cultural identity of a country by a foreign force was a painful violation of human rights and an insult to human dignity.
Rights of Reply
The representative of Iraq, speaking in right of reply, said the head of the Saudi delegation speaking about disappeared persons had invited the following response. The problem of disappeared persons should be governed by international law; Iraq had cooperated with the international system to find a solution to disappeared persons; it did not want to politicize this situation. Saudi Arabia had a problem related to the recovery of the body of a Saudi pilot; Iraq was fully ready to deal with this matter and to send the body of the pilot back to Saudi Arabia in cooperation with the International Committee of the Red Cross.
The representative of Sudan, speaking in right of reply, said he wished to respond to the statement by the representative of the United States. Sudan categorically rejected the unsubstantiated allegations of persecution suffered by Christians and traditional African believers. Religious freedom was fully guaranteed by the Constitution. From 1998 to 1999, more than 336 new churches had been granted licences and had been built in the 16 northern states. And in the remaining 10 states in the south, where the majority of the population practised traditional African religions, Sharia was not applied. Also, by alleging that children were sold as slaves in Sudan, the United States was not only insulting Sudan but also the Commission which in a resolution had referred to cases of abductions in war-affected areas. Sudan’s Government had established a committee for the eradication of the abduction of women and children. Levelling insulting and baseless allegations would not serve the noble cause of human rights. Instead, the United States should assist current efforts undertaken by the Government of Sudan to bring about a lasting peace in the country.
The representative of Yemen, speaking in right of reply, said in response to the report of the Special Rapporteur on arbitrary executions that there had been no such executions in Yemen; they were against the law. Progress towards respect for human rights in Yemen was irreversible; a cooperation agreement even had been reached between Yemen and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Yemeni Government was ready to continue such cooperation in the field of human rights.
The representative of China, speaking in right of reply, said a number of Western countries and non-governmental organizations had made groundless allegations against China concerning the Falun Gong group. China wished to say some things about this group. Falun Gong was not a religion but an evil cult whose leader predicted doom. The leader had preached absurdities and more than 1,500 persons had died for practising it while many others suffered. In banning the group, China had only done what any responsible Government would have done. From the outset, it had been clear that most of the followers of the group had been hoodwinked and the Chinese Government’s policy was to protect them. Now, 98 per cent of the followers were free of the psychological effects. The Government of China had only punished the criminal elements of the group who had violated criminal law. Some Western countries and NGOs turned a blind eye to the serious consequences of the preaching of Falun Gong in the society and resorted to fabricated lies. They were not interested in human rights in China but in their own secret agenda. This practise must be condemned.
The representative of Malaysia, speaking in right of reply, said he was referring to the statement by the Asian Cultural Forum on Development about the detention of Anwar Ibrahim, the former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia. Malaysia did not cast any doubt on the feelings of the speaker or dispute her right to speak. However, Mr. Ibrahim had sought to topple the Government -- that had forced the Government to act in order to preserve order and the rule of law. Attempts to portray Mr. Ibrahim as a reformer were misguided. The trial had been open to the public, and while it might have had its critics, it also had more than its fair share of supporters. The attack against Mr. Ibrahim had led to harsh punishment of the police official involved. Those who supported Mr. Ibrahim did in fact have a major recourse in Malaysia -- through the ballot box, the most basic court of all in a democracy.
The representative of Viet Nam, speaking in right of reply, said he wished to respond to the groundless accusations levelled by the International Federation of Human Rights in order to avoid misperceptions by the Commission of the true situation in his country. The non-governmental organization had misused this forum and misinformed the Commission members. The consistent policies of the Government to promote and protect the human rights of its people in all spheres were ignored. The Government attached great importance to the implementation of these rights and freedoms, including freedom of the press, in all aspects. The particular points and cases referred to were distorted and did not reflect the reality.
The representative of Turkey, speaking in right of reply, said the question of missing persons did not start as stated by the representative of Cyprus but much farther back, in 1963. Paying lip service to a matter did not help to solve it. If Cyprus was truly interested in resolving problems of missing persons in Cyprus, it should resolve the matter of missing Turkish Cypriots from the long-ago coup d'etat. The Greek Cypriot administration still had not notified families of missing persons it had said were known to be dead. It was not Turkish Cyprus that was destroying the Greek Cypriot heritage, furthermore, but the other way around.
The representative of Cyprus, speaking in right of reply, said that there was nothing new or surprising about the allegations by Turkey on the issue of destruction of cultural heritage. Turkey refused to give information on the destruction on the Cypriot heritage. Instead, it resorted to speaking about one case of criminal activity which concerned damage of $ 2,000. This parallel between one common criminal act and the extent of destruction and lotting of Cypriot heritage was so great that even Turkey could not sweep it under the carpet. Turkey would not succeed in its policy. Cypriots carried their heritage and culture in their hearts. Turkey had to stop its policies which would only strengthen the resolve of Cypriots. As for the issue of disappeared persons, Cyprus was not surprised that Turkey had taken a belligerent attitude of denial and allegations. Cyprus would not respond to these but hoped Turkey would take the road to humanity and cooperation as the families of all the missing persons deserved better.
The representative of Nigeria, speaking in right of reply, said the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions had stated that Nigeria had been among several countries to execute persons who had committed crimes when under age 18. Nigeria unequivocally rejected that assertion. Investigations of court proceedings confirmed that the case referred to involved a person well over 18 years of age at the time he committed offense.
The representative of Turkey, speaking in second right of reply in response to the Greek Cypriot representative, quoted a Greek Cypriot journalist George Lanitis, who was embarrassed for being used by the Greek Cypriot Government for promoting its propaganda stories of the missing persons issue. Turkey did not expect the Greek Cypriot representative to confess as open heartedly as Mr. Lanitis, but the sins committed against the loved ones of the missing lay solely on the shoulders of the Greek Cypriot administration that chose to exploit the situation politically. Evidence of the Greek Cypriot administration lying to relatives of the missing while in reality knowing that its authorities had killed these persons and buried them in mass graves was coming to light now.
The representative of Cyprus, speaking in a second right of reply, said he also wished to quote an authoritative body -- the European Court of Human Rights. The Court said Greek Cypriots still missing since 1973 were an indication that serious human-rights violations had been committed by Turkey. What was it that scared Turkey, or what did it hope to gain by prolonging this macabre human drama?
* *** *
56th session
6 April 2000
Afternoon
The Commission on Human Rights this afternoon continued to discuss the subject of civil and political rights, an agenda item that includes such matters as torture and detention; disappearances; summary executions; freedom of expression; independence of the judiciary, administration of justice, and impunity; religious intolerance; states of emergency; and conscientious objection to military service.
As in the previous two days of debate, statements by national delegations were predominantly descriptions of Government efforts to protect and enhance civil and political rights -- and also occasionally defences against allegations lodged by other countries and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
A representative of China, for example, charged that the United States and a handful of other countries had interfered unwarrantedly in China's judicial affairs by labelling the lawful punishment of criminal activities as violations of human rights. Such interference could not but show that such countries' so-called defense of judicial independence and fairness was bogus and their concern for human rights was phony, he said.
Tunisia contended that a visit of the Commission's Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression had resulted in a report that did not give sufficient attention to Tunisian achievements in such areas as the advancement of pluralism, tolerance, and women's rights, and that the report contained passages that seemed to be long quotations of distortions or lies from various biased NGOs on topics that had not been raised directly by the Special Rapporteur with the Tunisian Government.
And the Sudanese Government said it firmly respected human rights and opposed religious intolerance and wished the international community would take note of that and would recognize efforts made to better human rights in the country.
Addressing the afternoon meeting were representatives of Cuba, Nigeria, China, Lebanon, Sri Lanka, the Republic of Korea, Tunisia, India, Sudan, Malaysia, Uruguay, Iran, Switzerland, Ireland, Kazakhstan, Israel, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Algeria, Turkey, and Cyprus.
Iraq, Sudan, Yemen, China, Malaysia, Viet Nam, Turkey, Cyprus, and Nigeria spoke in exercise of the right of reply.
The Commission continued its review of civil and political rights in an evening session scheduled to adjourn as late as midnight.
Statements
MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ (Cuba) said the Commission's crisis in methods of work was more and more apparent every year when this agenda item came up. This year there were no less than 14 different subjects under this agenda item; no fewer than 76 documents with a total of 1,117 pages had been filed. Some reports had come in late. And of course it was likely that draft resolutions under this agenda item would come from the usual small group of countries and would be negotiated in unruly meetings at the last minute in small, crowded rooms where there would not be enough seats for everyone.
Who benefited from this deplorable situation? It was obvious that with the scanty resources that countries of the south had to cope with this avalanche of material on a very important subject, they had a hard time giving it the attention it deserved. Meanwhile, it was clear from debate and Commission activities so far that the powerful countries of the world considered that economic, social and cultural rights were a problem in the south, but not in the north. Last year, for example, of 101 urgent appeals directed to 39 Governments by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, only three Governments -- Belarus, ex-Yugoslavia, and Turkey -- were European; and among 36 opinions issued by the group, only three dealt with countries of the north.
P. D. COLE (Nigeria) recalled that his country, only a few years ago, had been brought under the intense searchlight of the Commission for various violations of human rights perpetuated by one of the worst regimes of Nigeria. Suffice to say that enormous damage had been done to Nigerians and to the nation. Having travelled down that road, Nigeria was now determined not to allow that regrettable experience to befall it again. The international community had been of great assistance in overcoming the human rights problems in Nigeria.
The principles of democracy, the respect for the rule of law, transparency, accountability and good governance had now been embraced by the present Government of President Obasanjo, who was himself a victim of the naked repression which occurred during the dark days of Nigeria's history. The adoption of democracy as a philosophy of governance, after one and half decades of almost uninterrupted military dictatorship in Nigeria had, no doubt, advanced the cause of the citizens's civil and political rights. The phenomenon of bribery and corruption had already been identified and condemned as pernicious violations of the rights of the people by the privileged few who abused public trust.
LI BAODONG (China) said his Government attached great importance to the promotion and protection of civil and political rights, and the achievements in that regard had been widely acknowledged. In March last year, the concept of running the country in accordance with the law was formally incorporated into the country's Constitution. The Chinese society was now in the process of transition from too much emphasis on the rule of person and insufficient emphasis on the rule of law to establishing the concept of the rule of law, and from supremacy of the power to supremacy of the law.
In recent years, the National People's Congress and its Standing Committee had adopted a series of important laws, including the Law on Prison, the Law on Judges and the Law on Layers. The judicial body had moved ahead with comprehensive reform to further enhance the fair administration of justice and to upgrade the level of law enforcement. In addition, the Chinese Constitution provided that the citizens enjoyed the freedom of religious belief. At present, there were more than 85,000 sites for religious activities in China, more than 300,000 clergy and more than 3,000 religious organizations. Concerning the prohibition of torture, China explicitly prohibited torture and meted out severe punishment against the use of it. It had also made great efforts to strengthen the legal system and develop democracy. Remarkable achievements had thus been scored in promoting and protecting all civil and political rights.
The United States and a handful of other countries had interfered unwarrantedly in China's judicial affairs by labelling the lawful punishment of criminal activities as violations of human rights. Such interference could not but show that such countries' so-called defense of judicial independence and fairness was bogus and their concern for human rights was phony.
The Chinese achievements were acknowledged by any one free of bias and certainly could not be negated by the United States and other western countries or a handful of non-governmental organizations through their lies. In the United States, deplorable human rights violations were taking place with serious racial discrimination against the blacks and the coloured. That country ranked first in the world in the proportion of prisoners among its population. The self-proclaimed democracy of the United States had always served the interests of a small number of wealthy people.
WALID NASR (Lebanon) said that in a small town in southern Lebanon, there was a detention camp where violations of civil and political rights occurred continually. The responsibility for the camp and for the violations rested with Israel; Israel had occupied the land, detained the detainees within, and Israeli police ran the operation. Some 140 persons were held there, including teenagers and elderly Lebanese. There were cases of whole families being detained there.
All were held arbitrarily, were not charged and were not tried. They were subjected to torture in various forms, including electric shocks and the pulling out of hair. Isolation was the norm; family visits were not allowed. Medical care was not provided, and so the health condition of the detainees was poor; the medical problems of some who had subsequently been released had included fractured skulls and other broken bones. Over 30 Lebanese detainees also were held in camps inside Israel, and they suffered similar treatment. The Commission must call for an end to these human-rights violations by Israel.
YASANTHA KODAGODA (Sri Lanka) said those who committed indiscriminate violence, assassinated political leaders, and murdered peace makers and human-rights defenders should not be recognized as "liberation fighters" but should be condemned as terrorists. The world community had a duty to develop measures to deal effectively with this major form of violation of human rights. Lacuna in the law should not provide a pretext for terrorists to use suicide bombers and advanced technology to destroy democratic society and the political framework of governance.
Governments such as that of Sri Lanka which were faced with terrorism would be encouraged if the international community took a more vibrant, progressive, pragmatic and functional role in battling against non-State entities which took part in terrorist activities. Non-governmental organizations, for their part, did valuable work but Sri Lanka felt concern that the interest shown by NGOs with regard to serious violations of human rights committed by terrorist groups was less than adequate. Sri Lanka had suffered immensely from terrorism -- had lost democratically elected officials to assassination, had had tens of thousands of innocent civilians killed, and had sustained economic damage beyond calculation. More really had to be done by the Commission and international community.
CHANG MAN SOON (the Republic of Korea) said his delegation could not fail to observe the stark reality that human rights violations around the world showed no signs of abating. Gross violations of human rights such as enforced and involuntary disappearances, arbitrary detentions and torture were still prevalent in many parts of the world. This situation called for more assertive efforts by the international community and political will from the Governments concerned. It would be timely and appropriate for the Commission to discuss ways and means of ensuring the effective implementation of the UN Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. Another form of gross human rights violation, namely torture, still persisted in many corners of the world and the Commission should spare no effort to facilitate progress on the work on the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture.
The role of the non-governmental organizations and the media in the common fight against torture was emphasized. The Korean Government had continued its efforts to improve its own mechanisms to safeguard human rights and to better guarantee civil and political rights. Foremost in efforts was the establishment of the National Human Rights Commission.
MOHAMED LESSIR (Tunisia) said debates on civil and political rights should be marked more by cooperation and should go beyond sterile debate and confrontation. Democracy and development and human rights were interdependent and mutually reinforcing. The promotion and daily practice of democracy depended on disseminating a human-rights culture, activities based on tolerance, and conduct of affairs based on the rule of law. Societies which had had hierarchical structures and non-democratic histories faced difficulties in establishing democracy, however there was little previous experience. The process was delicate.
Tunisia was seeking to establish a society based on human rights, tolerance, and solidarity. It also took into account historical and sociological realities in Tunisia -- it sought progress but also placed emphasis on stability. Reforms had been carried out progressively, year after year, to solidly establish a framework of democracy in Tunisia. Efforts were being made to avoid all forms of extremism, including through modification of laws and the national electoral code, which had been altered to ensure the presence of opposition parties in the Government.
SAVITRI KUNADI (India) said the phenomenon of terrorism posed one of the most serious threats to human rights. India believed that there was an urgent need for a comprehensive study on the impact of terrorism on the enjoyment of human rights. This was important as acts of terrorism had continued and were indeed on the increase. However, the debate on terrorism and its impact on human rights remained inconclusive partly because of genuine conceptual inadequacies and also because of the misleading propaganda of the State and non-State actors who sought to conceal their self-serving violent agenda behind lofty principles such as self-determination and freedom struggle.
Terrorism was totally at odds with a democratic and liberal society which allowed for the free expression of all shades of opinion and also for expression of dissent by non-violent and peaceful methods. There was also an urgent need to ensure the accountability of non-State actors who perpetrated terrorist acts and were increasingly responsible for massive abuses of human rights. India did not agree with those who maintained that it was only States that violated human rights. Organized terrorism prompted by certain States as an instrument of foreign policy was very different in scale, nature and consequences from actions of individuals and groups. India had been the victim of some of the most brutal manifestations of terrorism aided and abetted from across the border by a neighbouring country that had all along nurtured territorial ambitions on the India State of Jammu and Kashmir. The proxy war and this country's sponsorship of state terrorism for more than a decade had been responsible for gross violations of human rights by terrorists. Having itself been a victim of terrorism and fully realising the grave danger posed by it to enjoyment of all human rights, India was keen to promote the efforts of the international community to develop a common approach to combat terrorism.
In conclusion, the representative said she regretted the sweeping conclusions reached by the Special Rapporteur on religious intolerance concerning certain incidents of violence against members of a religious minority in India. India had sent a detailed response. The Indian Constitution guaranteed the freedom of religious belief and prohibited all forms of religious discrimination.
HASSAN EL TALIB (Sudan) said a number of steps had been taken to bolster civil and political rights in his country, including establishment of an Advisory Council for Human Rights in 1994; the release of all those accused of terrorist attacks in the bombing in Khartoum of July 1998; the amendment of the National Security Act to bring it into line with international standards; and the signing of an accord for technical assistance with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on 29 March 2000.
In Sudan the judiciary was independent, separation of powers was observed, and a Constitutional Court had recently been established. Social and religious tolerance was instinctive in Sudanese society; religious intolerance was outlawed by the Constitution; the southern states of the Republic had been exempted from Shari'a law; and new churches were regularly licensed and built. The Government wished that the international community would take note of this approach and this prevailing attitude of tolerance and respect for human rights in Sudan.
HAMIDON ALI (Malaysia) regretted when Governments, in making pronouncements on the situation of rights in other countries, failed to see both sides of the equation, concentrating only on the rights, without attention to responsibilities and the rule of law. The pious pronouncement by one delegation on the alleged repression of the freedom of opinion and of peaceful assembly in Malaysia was a case in point. For the sake of clarification, the delegation felt compelled to say that given the difficulties which Malaysia had faced at the outset of independence, namely the challenge of a multi-ethnic society and an economy based on the export of commodities, Malaysia had been written off as a country with few prospects for the future. Currently, while not obscenely rich as the perpetrators of pious pronouncements might be, Malaysia was not dirt poor. It could not have done this without democracy and sound socio-economic policies.
Concerning developments pertaining to the suit filed against the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the Government was distributing its views in an annex. However, Malaysia wished to say that the Special Rapporteur's report, while it purported to be factual, had a somewhat misleading, intentionally or otherwise, statement of facts which tended towards adverse inferences being made against the intentions or actions of the Government.
CARLOS SGARBI (Uruguay) stressed the importance of the respect for human rights. It was the responsibility of both States and the international community to promote and protect all human rights. States must play the role of both protector and guarantor through developing internal laws and regulations. States also had to take appropriate steps to stop all human rights violations. The international community had to come up with international mechanisms and laws to help protect human rights. Uruguay condemned all forms of violations of human rights which affected the right to life and supported the work of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial and summary executions. There was a need for effective mechanisms against torture and Uruguay would work with the Working Group on this.
The international community should be able to make progressive development in order to stop violations like summary executions, torture and forced disappearances. The Commission was encouraged to consider in detail the draft international convention on forced disappearances. At the outset of the new millennium, freedom of expression and belief should be enjoyed by all.
SEYED REZVANI (Iran) said that the democratization process in the country was marching forward on the solid foundation of democratic Islamic principles; the cornerstones of Iranian reforms were the promotion and protection of Constitutional liberties; upholding the rule of law; strengthening democratic norms and institutions; institutionalization of a culture of participation; full accountability of public officials; increasing transparency; strengthening of the institutions of civil society; promotion of tolerance and pluralism; confidence building; and the breaking of old barriers in foreign relations.
Democracies by definition were susceptible to dissention and rivalries; the approach taken by Iran was to promote and protect democratic values, ensure the rule of law and due process, and ensure security and stability. Freedom of expression and the press had been greatly enhanced recently -- in the past two and a half years, more than 400 new publications had been added to the Iranian press.
JEAN-DANIEL VIGNY (Switzerland) said the draft optional protocol to the Convention against Torture was an international preventive instrument which should be adopted by the Commission. Switzerland was encouraged with the work of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions and hoped that countries would continue to cooperate with it and respond to its recommendations. Switzerland hoped that Nepal and Viet Nam would continue to cooperate with the Working Group as Bhutan and China had done. Switzerland also believed that the Working Group was justified in sending urgent communications to Israel for its actions in the Al-Khiam prison in southern Lebanon. The Working Group had been able to visit Indonesia and East Timor in 1999, but unfortunately, it had not been able to visit Bahrain. The Working Group planned trips to Australia and Belarus this year.
Switzerland was worried that there had been 50,000 forced disappearances in the past decade in 70 countries and the Working Group's report stated that such disappearances continued in regions around the world. This was a most serious violation. It required appropriate response from the international community. Switzerland wondered if the existing mechanisms were sufficient to fight this scourge and asked if the draft International Convention for the Protection of all Persons Against Forced Disappearances which was adopted by the Subcommission on Promotion and Protection of Human Rights could not be studied in depth by the Commission. It suggested that an independent expert be named to revise the draft Convention, taking into consideration the views of countries, non-governmental organizations and the Working Group on Forced Disappearances.
In conclusion, Switzerland believed that the report of the Special Rapporteur against extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions reflected the gravity of this problem in the world. Switzerland urged States to cooperate individually and internationally in order to end these violations.
ANNE ANDERSON (Ireland) said her country supported the Special Rapporteur on independence of judges and lawyers in his call for an independent judicial inquiry into the murder of well-regarded Belfast lawyer Patrick Finucane more than 10 years ago, and shared the concern about allegations of collusion by security forces in Northern Ireland in this murder. The murder and the grave allegations arising from it had undermined confidence in the rule of law in Northern Ireland. Similarly, the murder of Rosemary Nelson in 1999 was a matter of great concern to the Irish Government, which had repeatedly said that the investigation into the murder must be thorough, transparent, and independent.
Ireland also supported the work of the Special Rapporteur on religious intolerance and was concerned about systematic persecution, torture, murder, and discrimination based on religious intolerance that was occurring around the world. Groups such as the Baha'i community in Iran and the people of Tibet must be free of religious persecution. Ireland would introduce a draft resolution on the implementation of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance based on Religion or Belief.
ERIK ZHUSSUPOV (Kazakhstan) said the debate on the protection of human rights in his country was developing and the Government was carrying out steps to develop civil society and to set up mechanisms to promote and protect all rights. Kazakhstan believed in the right of freedom of expression and in equality regardless of race, colour, religion or other factors. One of the conditions for realizing all human rights in Kazakhstan was the existence of international harmony, international stability, and the internal political and economic situation in the country. Kazakhstan was constantly developing the formation of its civil society. Standard setting was important and it was necessary to ensure basic international human rights.
Kazakhstan was party to various international human rights conventions. The situation in the country was changing for the better. Kazakhstan's Head of Government had decreed that the activities of law enforcement bodies should defend the interests of the State and should ensure that violations of human rights were not carried out and the rights of citizens were guaranteed. This was being implemented.
ADY SCHONMANN (Israel) said a controversial issue was the need for Governments and policy-makers to guarantee the right to free speech while combatting incitement to violence and other manifestations of hate speech. Israel today faced crucial and controversial questions that led to very heated debate; in general, laws and Government policy favoured free speech, but still incitement to racism and violence had long been prohibited.
Following the assassination of Prime Minister Yizhak Rabin, Israel had placed increased emphasis on combatting racism and incitement, among other things establishing a special team in the State Attorney's Office to monitor and enforce the law in these cases.
Tragically, manifestations of racism, anti-Semitism and hate speech continued to be pervasive on a large scale in today's world. In some parts of Europe this phenomenon was reaching worrisome levels. In the context of the Middle East peace process, Israel was not immune to the phenomenon -- just when intensive efforts were being made to advance peace negotiations, there was an unprecedented and orchestrated increase in inflammatory and hateful rhetoric, anti-Semitism, and holocaust denial, in several Arab countries, including those party to current negotiations with Israel. Such propaganda was often articulated and inspired by official sources and media to win public support to frustrate any step towards normalizing relations with Israel.
LUIS ZUNIGA (Nicaragua) said his country had suffered under a lengthily dictatorship and there had been many violations of civil and political rights. But thanks to the constant struggle of the people, the present Government continued to consolidate its protection and promotion of democracy and human rights, including the freedom of speech and expression. Economic success and development of any country depended on the quality of the Government of that country. Wherever there was an integral visions of human rights - all rights civil and political, and economic, social and cultural -- these countries enjoyed great advances in their development.
There was freedom of expression in Nicaragua under the present regime and under no time or any circumstances was it being violated. Nicaragua, having been a victim of the violation of civil and political rights in the past, urged the international community to continue to work to uphold all human rights, including civil and political rights.
NORA RUIZ DE ANGULO (Costa Rica) said the Commission Bureau and regional groups should seek a way of revising this agenda item so that it was not so broad and unworkable. Costa Rica had long believed in and acted for enhancement of civil and political rights, nationally, regionally, and internationally. Much had been done by the country through the Inter-American system. It was hoped there would soon be a permanent Inter-American Court that could consider human-rights complaints, as proposed by Costa Rica.
Costa Rica also had first suggested the draft optional protocol to the Convention against Torture, which would authorize visits to places of detention. The intent of the protocol was not to punish but to prevent; the point was not to add another judicial body investigating violations but to better involve experts in efforts to create situations that would reduce opportunities for carrying out torture. The draft protocol would be innovative and, Costa Rica felt, effective. It was part of the search for new strategies recommended by the High Commissioner for Human Rights and aimed at establishing preventive and early warning mechanisms. Costa Rica hoped a definitive text could soon be reached on the optional protocol.
MOHAMED EL AMINE (Algeria) said that in 1999, his country had held its second pluralistic presidential election with 7 candidates. Preceding the election was an electoral campaign which had been proved to be absolutely free. The new President had highlighted the need to create conditions for the rapid return to civil peace, to consolidate a state of law and to uphold civil and political rights and all human rights. At the political level, the Government had adopted a civil reconciliation agreement and the Supreme Judge
had issued an amnesty for many persons, including those condemned for subversion and terrorism. They had been freed. Given the importance of the judiciary, there was a thorough reform of the judiciary being carried out by an independent national commission. Algeria wished to have a proper dialogue with all international human rights mechanisms and wished to highlight the visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross and the European Troika which had been given free access.
BULENT MERIC (Turkey) said terrorism, which aimed at destabilizing legitimately constituted democratic Governments and undermining civil society and the rule of law, presented a major challenge which the international community must combat in concert. No nation was immune, and while terrorism might stem from different causes, such as ethnic, ideological or religious grievances, it had no justification. All necessary and effective measures must be taken against it in accordance with international law.
Turkey shared the opinion that terrorism was not only a criminal phenomenon and that it had a major impact on human rights. It was often argued that only States could commit human-rights violations and that what terrorists did was only a form of crime. In Turkey's view that argument did not carry much weight considering what actually was happening all over the globe. Such an approach to terrorism was erroneous and even incited terrorism. Turkey stressed that States must abide by the UN Charter and not provide safe haven to terrorists. Turkey and like-minded countries would present a new draft resolution this year on the matter of terrorism and its effect on human rights.
PETROS EFTYCHIOU (Cyprus) said disappearances constituted a multiple violation of basic and fundamental norms and principles of human rights. Disappearances continued to take place in various parts of the world. In Cyprus too, the families of the missing persons who disappeared during and after the Turkish invasion in 1974 were still waiting to learn in a conclusive manner whether their loved ones were alive or dead. Cyprus appealed to all concerned, especially to Turkey, to exhibit a humanitarian and a political will in order to help and assist these efforts. It was very tragic that despite efforts no progress had been achieved.
Another grievous aspect of the Cyprus problem was that of the systematic destruction of Cyprus’ cultural heritage. The list of archaeological sites and museums as well as private collections that had been plundered and destroyed in the occupied area was infinite. Turkey, a contracting party to the 1954 Hague Convention had failed to abide by, and respect its contractual obligations and had persistently acted contrary to the provisions of pertinent international instruments. Continues an systematic plundering of the religious, historical and cultural identity of a country by a foreign force was a painful violation of human rights and an insult to human dignity.
Rights of Reply
The representative of Iraq, speaking in right of reply, said the head of the Saudi delegation speaking about disappeared persons had invited the following response. The problem of disappeared persons should be governed by international law; Iraq had cooperated with the international system to find a solution to disappeared persons; it did not want to politicize this situation. Saudi Arabia had a problem related to the recovery of the body of a Saudi pilot; Iraq was fully ready to deal with this matter and to send the body of the pilot back to Saudi Arabia in cooperation with the International Committee of the Red Cross.
The representative of Sudan, speaking in right of reply, said he wished to respond to the statement by the representative of the United States. Sudan categorically rejected the unsubstantiated allegations of persecution suffered by Christians and traditional African believers. Religious freedom was fully guaranteed by the Constitution. From 1998 to 1999, more than 336 new churches had been granted licences and had been built in the 16 northern states. And in the remaining 10 states in the south, where the majority of the population practised traditional African religions, Sharia was not applied. Also, by alleging that children were sold as slaves in Sudan, the United States was not only insulting Sudan but also the Commission which in a resolution had referred to cases of abductions in war-affected areas. Sudan’s Government had established a committee for the eradication of the abduction of women and children. Levelling insulting and baseless allegations would not serve the noble cause of human rights. Instead, the United States should assist current efforts undertaken by the Government of Sudan to bring about a lasting peace in the country.
The representative of Yemen, speaking in right of reply, said in response to the report of the Special Rapporteur on arbitrary executions that there had been no such executions in Yemen; they were against the law. Progress towards respect for human rights in Yemen was irreversible; a cooperation agreement even had been reached between Yemen and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Yemeni Government was ready to continue such cooperation in the field of human rights.
The representative of China, speaking in right of reply, said a number of Western countries and non-governmental organizations had made groundless allegations against China concerning the Falun Gong group. China wished to say some things about this group. Falun Gong was not a religion but an evil cult whose leader predicted doom. The leader had preached absurdities and more than 1,500 persons had died for practising it while many others suffered. In banning the group, China had only done what any responsible Government would have done. From the outset, it had been clear that most of the followers of the group had been hoodwinked and the Chinese Government’s policy was to protect them. Now, 98 per cent of the followers were free of the psychological effects. The Government of China had only punished the criminal elements of the group who had violated criminal law. Some Western countries and NGOs turned a blind eye to the serious consequences of the preaching of Falun Gong in the society and resorted to fabricated lies. They were not interested in human rights in China but in their own secret agenda. This practise must be condemned.
The representative of Malaysia, speaking in right of reply, said he was referring to the statement by the Asian Cultural Forum on Development about the detention of Anwar Ibrahim, the former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia. Malaysia did not cast any doubt on the feelings of the speaker or dispute her right to speak. However, Mr. Ibrahim had sought to topple the Government -- that had forced the Government to act in order to preserve order and the rule of law. Attempts to portray Mr. Ibrahim as a reformer were misguided. The trial had been open to the public, and while it might have had its critics, it also had more than its fair share of supporters. The attack against Mr. Ibrahim had led to harsh punishment of the police official involved. Those who supported Mr. Ibrahim did in fact have a major recourse in Malaysia -- through the ballot box, the most basic court of all in a democracy.
The representative of Viet Nam, speaking in right of reply, said he wished to respond to the groundless accusations levelled by the International Federation of Human Rights in order to avoid misperceptions by the Commission of the true situation in his country. The non-governmental organization had misused this forum and misinformed the Commission members. The consistent policies of the Government to promote and protect the human rights of its people in all spheres were ignored. The Government attached great importance to the implementation of these rights and freedoms, including freedom of the press, in all aspects. The particular points and cases referred to were distorted and did not reflect the reality.
The representative of Turkey, speaking in right of reply, said the question of missing persons did not start as stated by the representative of Cyprus but much farther back, in 1963. Paying lip service to a matter did not help to solve it. If Cyprus was truly interested in resolving problems of missing persons in Cyprus, it should resolve the matter of missing Turkish Cypriots from the long-ago coup d'etat. The Greek Cypriot administration still had not notified families of missing persons it had said were known to be dead. It was not Turkish Cyprus that was destroying the Greek Cypriot heritage, furthermore, but the other way around.
The representative of Cyprus, speaking in right of reply, said that there was nothing new or surprising about the allegations by Turkey on the issue of destruction of cultural heritage. Turkey refused to give information on the destruction on the Cypriot heritage. Instead, it resorted to speaking about one case of criminal activity which concerned damage of $ 2,000. This parallel between one common criminal act and the extent of destruction and lotting of Cypriot heritage was so great that even Turkey could not sweep it under the carpet. Turkey would not succeed in its policy. Cypriots carried their heritage and culture in their hearts. Turkey had to stop its policies which would only strengthen the resolve of Cypriots. As for the issue of disappeared persons, Cyprus was not surprised that Turkey had taken a belligerent attitude of denial and allegations. Cyprus would not respond to these but hoped Turkey would take the road to humanity and cooperation as the families of all the missing persons deserved better.
The representative of Nigeria, speaking in right of reply, said the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions had stated that Nigeria had been among several countries to execute persons who had committed crimes when under age 18. Nigeria unequivocally rejected that assertion. Investigations of court proceedings confirmed that the case referred to involved a person well over 18 years of age at the time he committed offense.
The representative of Turkey, speaking in second right of reply in response to the Greek Cypriot representative, quoted a Greek Cypriot journalist George Lanitis, who was embarrassed for being used by the Greek Cypriot Government for promoting its propaganda stories of the missing persons issue. Turkey did not expect the Greek Cypriot representative to confess as open heartedly as Mr. Lanitis, but the sins committed against the loved ones of the missing lay solely on the shoulders of the Greek Cypriot administration that chose to exploit the situation politically. Evidence of the Greek Cypriot administration lying to relatives of the missing while in reality knowing that its authorities had killed these persons and buried them in mass graves was coming to light now.
The representative of Cyprus, speaking in a second right of reply, said he also wished to quote an authoritative body -- the European Court of Human Rights. The Court said Greek Cypriots still missing since 1973 were an indication that serious human-rights violations had been committed by Turkey. What was it that scared Turkey, or what did it hope to gain by prolonging this macabre human drama?
* *** *