Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Multiple Mechanisms
Default title
20 April 2000
Share
Commission on Human Rights
56th session
20 April 2000
Morning
Renews for Three Years Mandates of Special Rapporteur on Independence
of Judges and Lawyers, Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
The Commission on Human Rights this morning adopted 15 resolutions on civil and political rights in which it condemned, among other things, hostage taking; extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief; racism and torture.
The Commission called upon States to uphold the right to freedom of opinion and expression; to effectively implement the provisions of human rights in the administration of justice, particularly juvenile justice; and to protect the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, jurors and assessors and the independence of lawyers.
A resolution on human rights and terrorism was adopted by a show of hands vote of 27 in favour to 13 against and 12 abstentions, expressing unequivocal condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism, regardless of their motivation, in all their forms and manifestations, wherever and by whomever committed, as acts aimed at the destruction of human rights, fundamental freedoms and democracy.
In the resolution on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the Commission noted that impunity continued to be a major cause of the perpetuation of violations of human rights and reiterated the obligation of all Governments to conduct exhaustive and impartial investigations into all suspected cases of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, and to identify and bring to justice those responsible. Speakers urged States, NGOs and international organizations to submit their views and comments, as a matter of high priority, on the draft International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances, in particular on whether an intersessional working group should be set up to consider the draft Convention.
Resolutions were also adopted on human rights and forensic science, conscientious objection to military service, enforced or involuntary disappearances, and the right to restitution, compensation and rehabilitation for victims of grave violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
The Commission decided to renew for three years the mandates of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, and the Working Group on arbitrary detention. It asked the Working Group on the draft Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment to meet for two weeks with a view to completing expeditiously a final and substantive text.
The Commission will take further action on remaining draft resolutions when it reconvenes at 3 p.m. It will also be addressed by Benita Ferrero-Waldner, acting President of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
Action on draft resolutions
In a resolution on hostage-taking (E/CN.4/2000/L.38), adopted without a vote, the Commission reaffirmed that hostage-taking, wherever and by whomever committed, was an illegal act aimed at the destruction of human rights and was, under any circumstances, unjustifiable; condemned all acts of hostage-taking, anywhere in the world; demanded that all hostages be released immediately and without any preconditions; and called upon States to take all necessary measures, in accordance with relevant provisions of international law and international human rights standards, to prevent, combat and punish acts of hostage-taking.
The Commission, in a resolution on human rights and terrorism (E/CN.4/2000/L.39), adopted by a show of hands vote of 27 in favour to 13 against and 12 abstentions, reiterated unequivocal condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism, regardless of their motivation, in all their forms and manifestations, wherever and by whomever committed, as acts aimed at the destruction of human rights, fundamental freedoms and democracy, threatening the territorial integrity and security of States, destabilizing legitimately constituted Governments, undermining pluralistic civil society and the rule of law and having adverse consequence for the economic and social development of the State; condemned the violations of the right to live free from fear and of the right to life, liberty and security; expressed its solidarity with the victims of terrorism; condemned incitement of ethnic hatred, violence and terrorism; and urged the international community to enhance cooperation at the regional and international levels in the fight against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.
Further, the Commission called upon States to take appropriate measures, in conformity with the relevant provisions of national and international law, including international human rights standards, before granting refugee status, for the purpose of ensuring that an asylum-seeker had not participated in terrorist acts, including assassinations; and urged all relevant human rights mechanisms and procedures to address the consequences of the acts, methods and practices of terrorist groups in their forthcoming reports to the Commission.
YURI BOITCHENKO (the Russian Federation) said that it was crucial that the Commission continue to devote attention to the negative impact of terrorism on the realization of human rights. This negative impact was noted in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. Terrorism constituted a serious threat to democracy, institutions of civil society and legality. With the manifestation of terrorism encountered by many States, the issue deserved to remain on the Commission's agenda.
HAROLD KOH (the United States) regretted that his delegation would have to abstain in the vote. Terrorism did not respect human rights or fundamental freedoms. The United States would fully cooperate with international human rights mechanisms but the draft resolution included language which gave legitimacy to the status of terrorists in comparison with States. This issue was best discussed in other fora such as the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly (legal). In fact it was dangerous to respond in a heavy-handed way to the crime of terrorism. The rule of law should be applied fairly and consistently and more focus should be put on the increase of law enforcement capacities. The United States therefore called for a vote.
ALVARO MENDONCA (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union and the countries associated with it, said that the EU reaffirmed its unequivocal condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism as criminal and unjustifiable, wherever and by whoever committed, and whatever the considerations that might be invoked to justify them. As a matter of principle, the EU could not subscribe to the assertion that terrorist acts as such constituted human rights violations. Therefore, a clear distinction must be made between acts which were attributable to States, and criminal acts which were not, so as to avoid conferring on terrorists any status under international law. The EU also remained of the opinion that the Sixth Committee (legal) of the General Assembly was the forum best suited for a thorough examination of the question of terrorism and therefore it could not support that such an issue remain once more on the agenda of the Commission.
ANTONIO DE ICAZA (Mexico) said his country resolutely and unequivocally condemned terrorism. However, preambular paragraph 21 established an unacceptable linkage between terrorist acts and human rights, calling such acts violations of human rights rather than what they were -- crimes deserving criminal punishment. Thus Mexico would abstain in the vote on draft resolution L.39.
RONALD NAESS (Norway) said his country remained committed to the efforts to combat international terrorism, but would vote against the draft resolution because, inter alia, the Sixth Committee was a better suited forum for this discussion. Furthermore, Norway did not accept the language in the draft resolution implying that terrorism constituted a human rights violation. Only the State could be said to commit human rights violations.
SHIGEKI SUMI (Japan) said his country condemned all acts of terrorism and was committed to enhancing international cooperation in the fight against it. However, Japan could not accept the contention in the draft resolution that terrorists violated human rights. Rather, terrorists were criminals. Also it was clear that this issue should be dealt with in another forum, rather than in the Commission.
DEBORA CHATSIS (Canada) said that his country condemned the use of violent means to effect political change and had been at the forefront of the international fight against terrorism. Despite its strong commitment in this area, Canada was unable to support draft resolution L.39 on human rights and terrorism. The resolution as drafted failed to address the questions raised by the perpetration of terrorist acts in relation to human rights. The Commission's principal responsibility was to address violations of human rights, i.e. the violations by States of the obligations that they had with respect to their citizens pursuant to international law. While acts of terrorism unquestionably had tragic consequences for the enjoyment of human rights, terrorism was a crime. The Commission should not accord terrorists special status by treating them as anything other than criminals.
PEDRO OYARCE (Chile) said the delegation would abstain on the vote on the draft resolution and reiterated its position that the concept of human rights violations was institutional and within the sphere of the State. Chile reaffirmed its objection to any acts of terrorism. However, these crimes should be dealt with in other fora and punished within the framework of the rule of law.
VICTOR RODRIGUEZ (Venezuela) said his country opposed all terrorist actions, but only States assumed obligations in the field of human rights. Acts committed by terrorists were criminal acts. Preambular paragraph 21 of the draft resolution might legitimize terrorist groups, putting them on equal footing with States. Therefore Venezuela would abstain in the vote.
MIRGHANI IBRAHIM (Sudan) rejected terrorist acts committed for any purpose and by any group. Last week the Cabinet had passed an anti-terrorist law. Sudan supported draft resolution L.39 on human rights and terrorism.
In a resolution on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (E/CN.4/2000/L.40), approved by consensus, the Commission strongly condemned once again all the extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions that continued to take place throughout the world; demanded that all Governments ensure that the practice of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions was brought to an end and that they take effective action to combat and eliminate the phenomenon in all its forms; noted that impunity continued to be a major cause of the perpetuation of violations of human rights, including extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; and reiterated the obligation of all Governments to conduct exhaustive and impartial investigations into all suspected cases of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, to identify and bring to justice those responsible, to grant adequate compensation to the victims or their families and to adopt all necessary measures to prevent the recurrence of such executions.
The Commission noted with concern the large number of cases in various parts of the world of killings committed in the name of passion or in the name of honour, of persons killed because of their sexual orientation and persons killed for reasons related to their peaceful activities as human rights defenders or as journalists, as reported by the Special Rapporteur, and called upon Governments concerned to investigate such killings promptly and thoroughly, to bring those responsible to justice and to ensure that such killings were neither condoned nor sanctioned by government officials or personnel; called upon the Governments of all States in which the death penalty had not been abolished to comply with their obligations as reflected in relevant provisions of international human-rights instruments; urged Governments to undertake all necessary and possible measures to prevent loss of life during situations of public demonstration, internal and communal violence, disturbances, tension, and public emergency or armed conflicts, and to ensure that the police and security forces receive thorough training in human rights matters, in particular with regard to restrictions on the use of force and firearms in the discharge of their functions.
It requested the Special Rapporteur on the issue to continue to examine situations of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and to submit her findings on an annual basis, together with conclusions and recommendations, to the Commission; to respond effectively to information which came before her; to enhance further her dialogue with Governments; to continue to pay special attention to extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions of children and to allegations concerning violations of the right to life in the context of violence against participants in demonstrations and other peaceful public manifestations or against persons belonging to minorities.
NANCY RUBIN (the United States) expressed her delegation’s appreciation to Sweden and others responsible for this resolution. The United States particularly welcomed the inclusion of operative paragraph 6 on honour killings and sexual persuasion. The delegation of the United States was concerned by the killings of women for allegedly bringing shame to the family, and the threats and discrimination which gays and lesbians faced in almost all countries. It was the duty of Governments to investigate such incidents and to bring to justice the perpetrators against these vulnerable groups.
In a consensus resolution on human rights and forensic science (E/CN.4/2000/L.41), the Commission welcomed the increased use of forensic science investigations in situations where grave violations of human rights and international humanitarian law had occurred, and encouraged further coordination concerning, inter alia, the planning and realization of such investigations among Governments, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations; noted the progress made by the Office of the High Commissioner in the use of forensic experts, including the revised Cooperation Service Agreement regulating the use of forensic experts provided either by a Member State or by non-governmental organizations; recommended that the Office of the High Commissioner encourage forensic experts to coordinate further and produce additional manuals concerned with examination of living persons; and welcomed the initiative by the Office of the High Commissioner to publish the "Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment" in its Professional Training Services.
In a consensus resolution on the implementation of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (E/CN.4/2000/L.42), the Commission condemned all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief. It said it was encouraged by the efforts made by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to coordinate in the field of human rights the activities of relevant United Nations organs, bodies, and mechanisms dealing with all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief; and urged States, among other things, to ensure that their constitutional and legislative systems provided adequate and effective guarantees of freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief to all without discrimination; to ensure, in particular, that no one within their jurisdiction was deprived of the right to life or the right to liberty and security of person because of religion or belief, or was subjected to tortur
e or arbitrary arrest or detention on that account and to recognize the right of all persons to worship or assemble in connection with a religion or belief and to establish and maintain places for those purposes.
It emphasized, as underlined by the Human Rights Committee, that restrictions on the freedom to manifest religion or belief were permitted only if limitations were prescribed by law, were necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedom of others, and were applied in a manner that did not vitiate the right of freedom of thought, conscience and religion; encouraged the continuing efforts of the Special Rapporteur to examine incidents and governmental actions in all parts of the world that were incompatible with the provisions of the Declaration and to recommend remedial measures as appropriate; stressed the need for the Special Rapporteur to apply a gender perspective, inter alia through the identification of gender-specific abuses, in the reporting process, including in information collection and in recommendations; and decided to change the title of the Special Rapporteur from Special Rapporteur on religious intolerance to Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and that at this change would be implemented at the next extension of the Special Rapporteur's mandate.
In a consensus resolution on the conscientious objection to military service (E/CN.4/2000/L.43), the Commission called upon States to review their current laws and practices in relation to conscientious objection to military service in the light of Commission on Human Rights resolution 1998/77; and requested the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a compilation and analysis of best practices in relation to the recognition of the right of conscientious objection to military service and the provision of alternative forms of service, based on the provisions of resolution 1998/77, and to seek such information from Governments, the specialized agencies and relevant intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, and to submit a report containing that information to the Commission at its fifty-eighth session.
In a consensus resolution on a draft optional protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (E/CN.4/2000/L.44), the Commission took note of the report of the Working Group on the draft Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (E/CN.4/2000/58); requested the Working Group, in order to continue its work, to meet prior to the fifty-seventh session of the Commission for a period of two weeks, with a view to completing expeditiously a final and substantive text, and to report to the Commission at its fifty-seventh session; requested the Secretary-General to transmit the report of the Working Group to all Governments, the specialized agencies, the chairpersons of the human rights treaty bodies and intergovernmental organizations, and to invite them to submit their comments to the Working Group; also requested the Secretary-General to invite Governments, the specialized agencies and relevant intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, as well as the Chairperson of the Committee against Torture and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, to participate if needed in the activities of the Working Group; and recommended for adoption by the Working Group a draft decision on the issue.
In a resolution on the question of arbitrary detention (E/CN.4/2000/L.46), adopted by consensus, the Commission took note of the work of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and underlined the positive initiatives it had taken to strengthen cooperation and dialogue with States and the establishment of cooperation with all those concerned by the cases submitted to it for consideration, in accordance with its mandate; of the importance that the Working Group attached to coordination with other mechanisms of the Commission, with other competent United Nations bodies and with treaty bodies, as well as to the strengthening of the role of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in such coordination and encouraged the Working Group to take all the necessary measures to avoid duplication with those mechanisms, in particular regarding the treatment of the communications it received and the fields visits; requested the Governments concerned to take account of the Working Group’s views and to take appropriate steps to remedy the situation of persons arbitrarily deprived of their liberty and to inform the Working Group of the steps they had taken; encouraged the Governments concerned to implement the recommendations of the Working Group concerning persons mentioned in its report who had been detained for a number of years; to take appropriate measures in order to ensure that their legislation in those fields was in conformity with the relevant international standards and the relevant international legal instruments applicable to the States concerned; and not to extend states of emergency beyond what was strictly required by the situation, in accordance with the provisions of article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, or to limit their effects.
The resolution encouraged all Governments to invite the Working Group to visit their countries so that it might carry out its mandate even more effectively; requested the Governments concerned to give the necessary attention to "urgent appeals" addressed to them by the Working Group on a strictly humanitarian basis and without prejudging its possible final conclusions; also noted with concern the comments by the Working Group on the situation of human rights defenders; decided to renew, for a three-year period, the mandate of the Working Group, composed of five independent experts entrusted with the task of investigating cases of deprivation of liberty imposed arbitrarily, provided that no final decision had been taken in such cases by domestic courts in conformity with domestic law, with the relevant international standards set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and with the relevant international instruments accepted by the States concerned.
In a resolution on the question of enforced or involuntary disappearances (E/CN.4/2000/L.47), adopted without a vote, the Commission took note of the report submitted by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances; stressed the importance of the work of the Working Group and encouraged it, in the execution of its mandate, among other things, to continue to promote communication between families of disappeared persons and the Government concerned with a view to ensuring that sufficiently documented and clearly identified individual cases were investigated and to ascertain whether such information fell under its mandate and contained the required events; to continue to observe, in its humanitarian task, United Nations standards and practices regarding the handling of communications and the consideration of government replies; to continue to pay particular attention to cases of children subjected to enforced disappearance and children of disappeared persons and to cooperate closely with the Governments concerned in searching for and identifying these children; to pay particular attention to cases of disappearance of persons working for the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, wherever they occurred, and to make appropriate recommendations for preventing such disappearance and improving the protection of such persons; and to continue to apply a gender perspective in its reporting process, including in information collection and the formulating of recommendations.
The Commission deplored the fact that some Governments had never provided substantive replies concerning the cases of enforced disappearances in their countries or acted on the recommendations concerning them made in the reports of the Working Group. The Commission reminded Governments that all acts of enforced or involuntary disappearance were crimes punishable by appropriate penalties which should take due account of their extreme serousness under penal law; and that impunity was simultaneously one of the underlying causes of enforced disappearances and one of the major obstacles to the elucidation of cases thereof.
CARLA RODRIGUEZ-MANCIA (Guatemala) said that it had co-sponsored draft resolution L.47, on the question of involuntary or enforced disappearances. Guatemala attached great importance to paragraph 9 of the resolution which requested States, NGOs and international organizations to submit their views and comments, as a matter of high priority, on the draft Convention on the Protection of All Persons From Enforced Disappearances, in particular on whether an intersessional Working Group should be set up to consider the draft International Convention. Guatemala reiterated its commitment to promoting instruments to address forced disappearances.
LEANDRO DESPOUY (Argentina) said they were co-sponsors of the draft resolution and the essential points had already been covered, however, the delegation of Argentina wanted to underscore the high priority for the countries to consider the draft of the international convention to these infamous sinister practices. An instrument as that proposed was preventive in nature and could prevent these sinister crimes. The delegation of Argentina underlined the importance of the adoption of the resolution.
In a resolution on the right to freedom of opinion and expression (E/CN.4/2000/L.48), adopted without a vote, the Commission reaffirmed its commitment to the principles contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; expressed its continuing concern at the extensive occurrence of detention, long-term detention and extrajudicial killing, persecution and harassment, including through the abuse of legal provisions on criminal libel, of threats and acts of violence and of discrimination directed at persons who exercised the right to freedom of opinion and expression; and also expressed its concern at the number of cases on which the violations of those rights were facilitated and aggravated by several factors such as abuse of states of emergency, exercise of the powers specific to states of emergency without formal declaration and too vague a definition of offence against State security.
The Commission further expressed its concern that high rates of illiteracy continued to exist in the world, and reaffirmed that education was an integral component of the full and effective participation of persons in a free society, in particular for the full enjoyment of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and that the eradication of illiteracy was very important to the achievement of those goals and to the development of the human person; called for further progress towards release of persons detained for exercising the rights and freedoms bearing in mind that each individual was entitled to the full enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms; and urged Governments to implement effective measures to eliminate the atmosphere of fear which often prevented women who had been victims of violence, either in domestic or community settings or as a result of armed conflict, from communicating freely on their own behalf or through intermediaries.
The Commission appealed to all States to ensure respect and support for the rights of all persons who exercised the right to freedom of opinion and expression, including the right to seek, receive and impart information regardless of frontiers, the rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, peaceful assembly and association and the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs. It urged that all States ensure that persons seeking to exercise those rights and freedoms were not discriminated against, particularly in such areas as employment, housing and social service, and in that context to pay particular attention to the situation of women; invited the Special Rapporteur, within the framework of his mandate, to draw the attention of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to those situations and cases regarding freedom of opinion and expression which were of particularly serious concern to the Special Rapporteur, and encouraged the High Commissioner, within her mandate, to take into account reports in that regard in the context for her activities to promote and protect human rights, with a view to preventing the occurrence and recurrence of human rights violations; expressed once again its concern at the inadequate resources, both human and material, provided to the Special Rapporteur, and accordingly reiterated its request to the Secretary-General to provide the assistance necessary to the Special Rapporteur to fulfil his mandate effectively, in particular by placing adequate human and material resources at his disposal.
Regarding a resolution on human rights in the administration of justice, in particular, juvenile justice (E/CN.4/2000/L.49), adopted by consensus, the Commission reaffirmed the importance of the full and effective implementation of all United Nations standards on human rights in the administration of justice; reiterated its call to all Member States to spare no effort in providing for effective legislative and other mechanisms and procedures, as well as adequate resources, to ensure the full implementation of those standards; appealed to Governments to include in their national development plans the administration of justice as an integral part of the development process and to allocate adequate resources for the provision of legal-aid services with a view to the promotion and protection of human rights; and invited Governments to provide training, including gender-sensitive training, in human rights and in the administration of justice, including juvenile justice, to all judges, lawyers, prosecutors, social worker, immigration and police officers, and other professional concerned, including personnel employed in internal field presences.
The Commission also stressed the special need for national capacity-building in the field of the administration of justice, in particular to establish and maintain stable societies and the rule of law in post-conflict situations, through reform of the judiciary, the police and the penal system, as well as juvenile justice reform; recognized that every child and juvenile in conflict with the law should be treated in a manner consistent with his or her dignity and needs, in accordance with the relevant principles and provisions embodied in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and other relevant standards on human rights in the administration of justice; took note of the concern of the Committee on the Rights of the Child that in all regions of the world and in relation to all legal systems the provision of the Convention on the Rights of the Child relating to the administration of juvenile justice were in many instance not reflected in national legislation or practice; recognized the necessity of ensuring effective implementation of the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and international standards relating to juvenile justice and invites States to improve the status of information on the situation of juvenile justice to that end; and underlines that raising awareness of the specific situation of children and juveniles in the administration of justice and providing training thereon were crucial in strengthening the implementation of international standards in that field and, in this regard, welcomed the finalization and dissemination of a training manual on juvenile justice, entitled "The child criminal justice manual".
In a resolution on the incompatibility between democracy and racism (E/CN.4/2000/L.50), adopted by consensus, the Commission urged States to reinforce their commitment to promote tolerance and to fight racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance as a way to strengthen democracy and transparent and accountable governance; and invited the mechanisms of the Commission on Human Rights and the treaty bodies, in particular the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination and related intolerance, to continue to pay particular attention to violations of human rights stemming from the rise of racism and xenophobia in political circles and society at large, especially with regards to their incompatibility with democracy.
HAROLD KOH (the United States) said the resolution on the compatibility of democracy and racism was an important component of the Commission's work to promote universal human rights. The resolution highlighted the obligation of democratic governments to combat racism. The United States was deeply committed to this effort and was pleased to cosponsor the resolution.
In a consensus resolution on the right to restitution, compensation and rehabilitation for victims of grave violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms (E/CN.4/2000/.L.51), the Commission called upon the international community to give due attention to the rights to restitution, compensation and rehabilitation for victims of grave violations of human rights; requested the Secretary-General to circulate to all Members States the text of the "Basic principles and guidelines on the right to a remedy and reparation for victims of violations of international human rights and humanitarian law", annexed to the final report of the Independent Expert and to request that they send their comments thereon to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights; and requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to hold a consultative meeting in Geneva for all interested Governments, intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations, using available resources, with a view to finalizing the principles and guidelines on the basis of the comments submitted.
In a resolution on the Independence and impartiality of the judiciary, jurors and assessors and the independence of lawyers (E/CN.4/2000/L.53), the Commission welcomed the numerous exchanges the Special Rapporteur had had with several intergovernmental and international organizations and United Nations bodies, and encouraged him to continue along that path; noted with appreciation the determination of the Special Rapporteur to achieve as wide a dissemination as possible of information about existing standards relating to the independence and impartiality of the judiciary and the independence of the legal profession in conjunction with the publications and promotional activities of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights; invited the High Commissioner to continue to provide technical assistance to train judges and lawyers and to associate the Special Rapporteur in the elaboration of a manual on the training of judges and lawyers in the field of human rights; urged all Governments to assist the Special Rapporteur in the discharge of his mandate and to transmit to him all the information requested; encouraged Governments that face difficulties in guaranteeing the independence of judges and lawyers, or that were determined to take measures to implement those principles further, to consult and to consider the services of the Special Rapporteur, for instance by inviting him to their country if the Government concerned deem it necessary; decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur for that further period of three years, requests him to submit a report on the activities relating to his mandate to the Commission at its fifty-seventh session and decides to consider this question at that session; requests the Secretary-General, within the limits of the United Nations regular budget, to provide the Special Rapporteur with any assistance needed for the discharge of his mandate.
In a resolution on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (E/CN.4/2000/l.54), the Commission called upon all Governments to implement fully the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; urged all Governments to promote the speedy and full implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action relating to freedom from torture, in which it was stated that States should abrogate legislation leading to impunity for those responsible for grave violations of human rights such as torture and prosecute such violations, thereby providing a firm basis for the rule of law; reminded Governments that corporal punishment, including of children could amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or even to torture;
It condemned all forms of torture, including through intimidation, as described in article 1 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; and reminded all States that prolonged incommunicado detention might facilitate the perpetration of torture and could in itself constitute a form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and urged all States to respect the safeguards concerning the liberty, security and dignity of the person.
Further, the Commission urged all States to become parties to the Convention against Torture as a matter of priority; and emphasized the obligation of States parties under article 10 of the Convention against Torture to ensure education and training for persons who might be involved in the custody, interrogation or treatment of any individual subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment. It appealed to all Governments, organizations and individuals to contribute annually to the Board of Trustees of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture and, if possible with a substantial increase in the contributions in order to take into consideration the ever-increasing requests for assistance.
CORRIGENDUM
In press release HR/CN/00/45 of 14 April, the statement of the International Federation of Rural Adult Catholics on page 10 should read as follows:
PIERRE MIOT, of the International Federation of Rural Adult Catholics, said that the appropriation of traditional wisdom by transnational companies was dishonest. This practice sometimes involved the confiscation of living materials, particularly in Latin America, Africa and Asia in regions of environmental biodiversity. According to the law, only inventions could be given patents. As often noted by indigenous leaders, no one could claim for themselves what already existed in nature. African countries had taken the initiative to declare opposition to the patenting of living organism. This battle was difficult to fight due to the intellectual property rights and appropriation by agro-industrial firms or pharmaceuticals. It was necessary to remember four points, the importance of the Convention on biological biodiversity, that WIPO should protect the know how of indigenous peoples, to have the prior consent of indigenous people and provide for equitable division of benefits, and the conformity of national legislation to avoid transnational companies taking advantage of legal loopholes. The genetic world heritage was not subject to trade.
In press release HE/CN/00/55 of 19 April 2000, the statement of Amnesty International on page 5 should read as follows:
YVONNE TERLINGEN, of Amnesty International, also speaking on behalf of Human Rights Watch, said the report had not provided an adequate response to the serious problems faced by many Special Rapporteurs, such as the lack of adequate support from the United Nations and lack of effective cooperation from many States. The Working Group's proposals on States' cooperation with special procedures lacked substance. The Commission should call upon all States to extend open invitations to special procedures to visit their countries at the start of Commission sessions, and ensure that the UN Secretary-General was informed of any State that persistently refused to cooperate with special procedures.
The Commission should create adequate time and space for a thorough discussion during its sessions of special procedures' reports. The Commission should also ask the High Commissioner to provide an assessment of the resource requirements for professional long-term support for special procedures and urge its member States to instruct their delegations to vote for the allocation of the necessary resources from the regular budget.
* *** *
56th session
20 April 2000
Morning
Renews for Three Years Mandates of Special Rapporteur on Independence
of Judges and Lawyers, Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
The Commission on Human Rights this morning adopted 15 resolutions on civil and political rights in which it condemned, among other things, hostage taking; extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief; racism and torture.
The Commission called upon States to uphold the right to freedom of opinion and expression; to effectively implement the provisions of human rights in the administration of justice, particularly juvenile justice; and to protect the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, jurors and assessors and the independence of lawyers.
A resolution on human rights and terrorism was adopted by a show of hands vote of 27 in favour to 13 against and 12 abstentions, expressing unequivocal condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism, regardless of their motivation, in all their forms and manifestations, wherever and by whomever committed, as acts aimed at the destruction of human rights, fundamental freedoms and democracy.
In the resolution on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the Commission noted that impunity continued to be a major cause of the perpetuation of violations of human rights and reiterated the obligation of all Governments to conduct exhaustive and impartial investigations into all suspected cases of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, and to identify and bring to justice those responsible. Speakers urged States, NGOs and international organizations to submit their views and comments, as a matter of high priority, on the draft International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances, in particular on whether an intersessional working group should be set up to consider the draft Convention.
Resolutions were also adopted on human rights and forensic science, conscientious objection to military service, enforced or involuntary disappearances, and the right to restitution, compensation and rehabilitation for victims of grave violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
The Commission decided to renew for three years the mandates of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, and the Working Group on arbitrary detention. It asked the Working Group on the draft Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment to meet for two weeks with a view to completing expeditiously a final and substantive text.
The Commission will take further action on remaining draft resolutions when it reconvenes at 3 p.m. It will also be addressed by Benita Ferrero-Waldner, acting President of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
Action on draft resolutions
In a resolution on hostage-taking (E/CN.4/2000/L.38), adopted without a vote, the Commission reaffirmed that hostage-taking, wherever and by whomever committed, was an illegal act aimed at the destruction of human rights and was, under any circumstances, unjustifiable; condemned all acts of hostage-taking, anywhere in the world; demanded that all hostages be released immediately and without any preconditions; and called upon States to take all necessary measures, in accordance with relevant provisions of international law and international human rights standards, to prevent, combat and punish acts of hostage-taking.
The Commission, in a resolution on human rights and terrorism (E/CN.4/2000/L.39), adopted by a show of hands vote of 27 in favour to 13 against and 12 abstentions, reiterated unequivocal condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism, regardless of their motivation, in all their forms and manifestations, wherever and by whomever committed, as acts aimed at the destruction of human rights, fundamental freedoms and democracy, threatening the territorial integrity and security of States, destabilizing legitimately constituted Governments, undermining pluralistic civil society and the rule of law and having adverse consequence for the economic and social development of the State; condemned the violations of the right to live free from fear and of the right to life, liberty and security; expressed its solidarity with the victims of terrorism; condemned incitement of ethnic hatred, violence and terrorism; and urged the international community to enhance cooperation at the regional and international levels in the fight against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.
Further, the Commission called upon States to take appropriate measures, in conformity with the relevant provisions of national and international law, including international human rights standards, before granting refugee status, for the purpose of ensuring that an asylum-seeker had not participated in terrorist acts, including assassinations; and urged all relevant human rights mechanisms and procedures to address the consequences of the acts, methods and practices of terrorist groups in their forthcoming reports to the Commission.
YURI BOITCHENKO (the Russian Federation) said that it was crucial that the Commission continue to devote attention to the negative impact of terrorism on the realization of human rights. This negative impact was noted in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. Terrorism constituted a serious threat to democracy, institutions of civil society and legality. With the manifestation of terrorism encountered by many States, the issue deserved to remain on the Commission's agenda.
HAROLD KOH (the United States) regretted that his delegation would have to abstain in the vote. Terrorism did not respect human rights or fundamental freedoms. The United States would fully cooperate with international human rights mechanisms but the draft resolution included language which gave legitimacy to the status of terrorists in comparison with States. This issue was best discussed in other fora such as the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly (legal). In fact it was dangerous to respond in a heavy-handed way to the crime of terrorism. The rule of law should be applied fairly and consistently and more focus should be put on the increase of law enforcement capacities. The United States therefore called for a vote.
ALVARO MENDONCA (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union and the countries associated with it, said that the EU reaffirmed its unequivocal condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism as criminal and unjustifiable, wherever and by whoever committed, and whatever the considerations that might be invoked to justify them. As a matter of principle, the EU could not subscribe to the assertion that terrorist acts as such constituted human rights violations. Therefore, a clear distinction must be made between acts which were attributable to States, and criminal acts which were not, so as to avoid conferring on terrorists any status under international law. The EU also remained of the opinion that the Sixth Committee (legal) of the General Assembly was the forum best suited for a thorough examination of the question of terrorism and therefore it could not support that such an issue remain once more on the agenda of the Commission.
ANTONIO DE ICAZA (Mexico) said his country resolutely and unequivocally condemned terrorism. However, preambular paragraph 21 established an unacceptable linkage between terrorist acts and human rights, calling such acts violations of human rights rather than what they were -- crimes deserving criminal punishment. Thus Mexico would abstain in the vote on draft resolution L.39.
RONALD NAESS (Norway) said his country remained committed to the efforts to combat international terrorism, but would vote against the draft resolution because, inter alia, the Sixth Committee was a better suited forum for this discussion. Furthermore, Norway did not accept the language in the draft resolution implying that terrorism constituted a human rights violation. Only the State could be said to commit human rights violations.
SHIGEKI SUMI (Japan) said his country condemned all acts of terrorism and was committed to enhancing international cooperation in the fight against it. However, Japan could not accept the contention in the draft resolution that terrorists violated human rights. Rather, terrorists were criminals. Also it was clear that this issue should be dealt with in another forum, rather than in the Commission.
DEBORA CHATSIS (Canada) said that his country condemned the use of violent means to effect political change and had been at the forefront of the international fight against terrorism. Despite its strong commitment in this area, Canada was unable to support draft resolution L.39 on human rights and terrorism. The resolution as drafted failed to address the questions raised by the perpetration of terrorist acts in relation to human rights. The Commission's principal responsibility was to address violations of human rights, i.e. the violations by States of the obligations that they had with respect to their citizens pursuant to international law. While acts of terrorism unquestionably had tragic consequences for the enjoyment of human rights, terrorism was a crime. The Commission should not accord terrorists special status by treating them as anything other than criminals.
PEDRO OYARCE (Chile) said the delegation would abstain on the vote on the draft resolution and reiterated its position that the concept of human rights violations was institutional and within the sphere of the State. Chile reaffirmed its objection to any acts of terrorism. However, these crimes should be dealt with in other fora and punished within the framework of the rule of law.
VICTOR RODRIGUEZ (Venezuela) said his country opposed all terrorist actions, but only States assumed obligations in the field of human rights. Acts committed by terrorists were criminal acts. Preambular paragraph 21 of the draft resolution might legitimize terrorist groups, putting them on equal footing with States. Therefore Venezuela would abstain in the vote.
MIRGHANI IBRAHIM (Sudan) rejected terrorist acts committed for any purpose and by any group. Last week the Cabinet had passed an anti-terrorist law. Sudan supported draft resolution L.39 on human rights and terrorism.
In a resolution on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (E/CN.4/2000/L.40), approved by consensus, the Commission strongly condemned once again all the extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions that continued to take place throughout the world; demanded that all Governments ensure that the practice of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions was brought to an end and that they take effective action to combat and eliminate the phenomenon in all its forms; noted that impunity continued to be a major cause of the perpetuation of violations of human rights, including extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; and reiterated the obligation of all Governments to conduct exhaustive and impartial investigations into all suspected cases of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, to identify and bring to justice those responsible, to grant adequate compensation to the victims or their families and to adopt all necessary measures to prevent the recurrence of such executions.
The Commission noted with concern the large number of cases in various parts of the world of killings committed in the name of passion or in the name of honour, of persons killed because of their sexual orientation and persons killed for reasons related to their peaceful activities as human rights defenders or as journalists, as reported by the Special Rapporteur, and called upon Governments concerned to investigate such killings promptly and thoroughly, to bring those responsible to justice and to ensure that such killings were neither condoned nor sanctioned by government officials or personnel; called upon the Governments of all States in which the death penalty had not been abolished to comply with their obligations as reflected in relevant provisions of international human-rights instruments; urged Governments to undertake all necessary and possible measures to prevent loss of life during situations of public demonstration, internal and communal violence, disturbances, tension, and public emergency or armed conflicts, and to ensure that the police and security forces receive thorough training in human rights matters, in particular with regard to restrictions on the use of force and firearms in the discharge of their functions.
It requested the Special Rapporteur on the issue to continue to examine situations of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and to submit her findings on an annual basis, together with conclusions and recommendations, to the Commission; to respond effectively to information which came before her; to enhance further her dialogue with Governments; to continue to pay special attention to extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions of children and to allegations concerning violations of the right to life in the context of violence against participants in demonstrations and other peaceful public manifestations or against persons belonging to minorities.
NANCY RUBIN (the United States) expressed her delegation’s appreciation to Sweden and others responsible for this resolution. The United States particularly welcomed the inclusion of operative paragraph 6 on honour killings and sexual persuasion. The delegation of the United States was concerned by the killings of women for allegedly bringing shame to the family, and the threats and discrimination which gays and lesbians faced in almost all countries. It was the duty of Governments to investigate such incidents and to bring to justice the perpetrators against these vulnerable groups.
In a consensus resolution on human rights and forensic science (E/CN.4/2000/L.41), the Commission welcomed the increased use of forensic science investigations in situations where grave violations of human rights and international humanitarian law had occurred, and encouraged further coordination concerning, inter alia, the planning and realization of such investigations among Governments, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations; noted the progress made by the Office of the High Commissioner in the use of forensic experts, including the revised Cooperation Service Agreement regulating the use of forensic experts provided either by a Member State or by non-governmental organizations; recommended that the Office of the High Commissioner encourage forensic experts to coordinate further and produce additional manuals concerned with examination of living persons; and welcomed the initiative by the Office of the High Commissioner to publish the "Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment" in its Professional Training Services.
In a consensus resolution on the implementation of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (E/CN.4/2000/L.42), the Commission condemned all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief. It said it was encouraged by the efforts made by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to coordinate in the field of human rights the activities of relevant United Nations organs, bodies, and mechanisms dealing with all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief; and urged States, among other things, to ensure that their constitutional and legislative systems provided adequate and effective guarantees of freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief to all without discrimination; to ensure, in particular, that no one within their jurisdiction was deprived of the right to life or the right to liberty and security of person because of religion or belief, or was subjected to tortur
e or arbitrary arrest or detention on that account and to recognize the right of all persons to worship or assemble in connection with a religion or belief and to establish and maintain places for those purposes.
It emphasized, as underlined by the Human Rights Committee, that restrictions on the freedom to manifest religion or belief were permitted only if limitations were prescribed by law, were necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedom of others, and were applied in a manner that did not vitiate the right of freedom of thought, conscience and religion; encouraged the continuing efforts of the Special Rapporteur to examine incidents and governmental actions in all parts of the world that were incompatible with the provisions of the Declaration and to recommend remedial measures as appropriate; stressed the need for the Special Rapporteur to apply a gender perspective, inter alia through the identification of gender-specific abuses, in the reporting process, including in information collection and in recommendations; and decided to change the title of the Special Rapporteur from Special Rapporteur on religious intolerance to Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and that at this change would be implemented at the next extension of the Special Rapporteur's mandate.
In a consensus resolution on the conscientious objection to military service (E/CN.4/2000/L.43), the Commission called upon States to review their current laws and practices in relation to conscientious objection to military service in the light of Commission on Human Rights resolution 1998/77; and requested the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a compilation and analysis of best practices in relation to the recognition of the right of conscientious objection to military service and the provision of alternative forms of service, based on the provisions of resolution 1998/77, and to seek such information from Governments, the specialized agencies and relevant intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, and to submit a report containing that information to the Commission at its fifty-eighth session.
In a consensus resolution on a draft optional protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (E/CN.4/2000/L.44), the Commission took note of the report of the Working Group on the draft Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (E/CN.4/2000/58); requested the Working Group, in order to continue its work, to meet prior to the fifty-seventh session of the Commission for a period of two weeks, with a view to completing expeditiously a final and substantive text, and to report to the Commission at its fifty-seventh session; requested the Secretary-General to transmit the report of the Working Group to all Governments, the specialized agencies, the chairpersons of the human rights treaty bodies and intergovernmental organizations, and to invite them to submit their comments to the Working Group; also requested the Secretary-General to invite Governments, the specialized agencies and relevant intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, as well as the Chairperson of the Committee against Torture and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, to participate if needed in the activities of the Working Group; and recommended for adoption by the Working Group a draft decision on the issue.
In a resolution on the question of arbitrary detention (E/CN.4/2000/L.46), adopted by consensus, the Commission took note of the work of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and underlined the positive initiatives it had taken to strengthen cooperation and dialogue with States and the establishment of cooperation with all those concerned by the cases submitted to it for consideration, in accordance with its mandate; of the importance that the Working Group attached to coordination with other mechanisms of the Commission, with other competent United Nations bodies and with treaty bodies, as well as to the strengthening of the role of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in such coordination and encouraged the Working Group to take all the necessary measures to avoid duplication with those mechanisms, in particular regarding the treatment of the communications it received and the fields visits; requested the Governments concerned to take account of the Working Group’s views and to take appropriate steps to remedy the situation of persons arbitrarily deprived of their liberty and to inform the Working Group of the steps they had taken; encouraged the Governments concerned to implement the recommendations of the Working Group concerning persons mentioned in its report who had been detained for a number of years; to take appropriate measures in order to ensure that their legislation in those fields was in conformity with the relevant international standards and the relevant international legal instruments applicable to the States concerned; and not to extend states of emergency beyond what was strictly required by the situation, in accordance with the provisions of article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, or to limit their effects.
The resolution encouraged all Governments to invite the Working Group to visit their countries so that it might carry out its mandate even more effectively; requested the Governments concerned to give the necessary attention to "urgent appeals" addressed to them by the Working Group on a strictly humanitarian basis and without prejudging its possible final conclusions; also noted with concern the comments by the Working Group on the situation of human rights defenders; decided to renew, for a three-year period, the mandate of the Working Group, composed of five independent experts entrusted with the task of investigating cases of deprivation of liberty imposed arbitrarily, provided that no final decision had been taken in such cases by domestic courts in conformity with domestic law, with the relevant international standards set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and with the relevant international instruments accepted by the States concerned.
In a resolution on the question of enforced or involuntary disappearances (E/CN.4/2000/L.47), adopted without a vote, the Commission took note of the report submitted by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances; stressed the importance of the work of the Working Group and encouraged it, in the execution of its mandate, among other things, to continue to promote communication between families of disappeared persons and the Government concerned with a view to ensuring that sufficiently documented and clearly identified individual cases were investigated and to ascertain whether such information fell under its mandate and contained the required events; to continue to observe, in its humanitarian task, United Nations standards and practices regarding the handling of communications and the consideration of government replies; to continue to pay particular attention to cases of children subjected to enforced disappearance and children of disappeared persons and to cooperate closely with the Governments concerned in searching for and identifying these children; to pay particular attention to cases of disappearance of persons working for the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, wherever they occurred, and to make appropriate recommendations for preventing such disappearance and improving the protection of such persons; and to continue to apply a gender perspective in its reporting process, including in information collection and the formulating of recommendations.
The Commission deplored the fact that some Governments had never provided substantive replies concerning the cases of enforced disappearances in their countries or acted on the recommendations concerning them made in the reports of the Working Group. The Commission reminded Governments that all acts of enforced or involuntary disappearance were crimes punishable by appropriate penalties which should take due account of their extreme serousness under penal law; and that impunity was simultaneously one of the underlying causes of enforced disappearances and one of the major obstacles to the elucidation of cases thereof.
CARLA RODRIGUEZ-MANCIA (Guatemala) said that it had co-sponsored draft resolution L.47, on the question of involuntary or enforced disappearances. Guatemala attached great importance to paragraph 9 of the resolution which requested States, NGOs and international organizations to submit their views and comments, as a matter of high priority, on the draft Convention on the Protection of All Persons From Enforced Disappearances, in particular on whether an intersessional Working Group should be set up to consider the draft International Convention. Guatemala reiterated its commitment to promoting instruments to address forced disappearances.
LEANDRO DESPOUY (Argentina) said they were co-sponsors of the draft resolution and the essential points had already been covered, however, the delegation of Argentina wanted to underscore the high priority for the countries to consider the draft of the international convention to these infamous sinister practices. An instrument as that proposed was preventive in nature and could prevent these sinister crimes. The delegation of Argentina underlined the importance of the adoption of the resolution.
In a resolution on the right to freedom of opinion and expression (E/CN.4/2000/L.48), adopted without a vote, the Commission reaffirmed its commitment to the principles contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; expressed its continuing concern at the extensive occurrence of detention, long-term detention and extrajudicial killing, persecution and harassment, including through the abuse of legal provisions on criminal libel, of threats and acts of violence and of discrimination directed at persons who exercised the right to freedom of opinion and expression; and also expressed its concern at the number of cases on which the violations of those rights were facilitated and aggravated by several factors such as abuse of states of emergency, exercise of the powers specific to states of emergency without formal declaration and too vague a definition of offence against State security.
The Commission further expressed its concern that high rates of illiteracy continued to exist in the world, and reaffirmed that education was an integral component of the full and effective participation of persons in a free society, in particular for the full enjoyment of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and that the eradication of illiteracy was very important to the achievement of those goals and to the development of the human person; called for further progress towards release of persons detained for exercising the rights and freedoms bearing in mind that each individual was entitled to the full enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms; and urged Governments to implement effective measures to eliminate the atmosphere of fear which often prevented women who had been victims of violence, either in domestic or community settings or as a result of armed conflict, from communicating freely on their own behalf or through intermediaries.
The Commission appealed to all States to ensure respect and support for the rights of all persons who exercised the right to freedom of opinion and expression, including the right to seek, receive and impart information regardless of frontiers, the rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, peaceful assembly and association and the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs. It urged that all States ensure that persons seeking to exercise those rights and freedoms were not discriminated against, particularly in such areas as employment, housing and social service, and in that context to pay particular attention to the situation of women; invited the Special Rapporteur, within the framework of his mandate, to draw the attention of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to those situations and cases regarding freedom of opinion and expression which were of particularly serious concern to the Special Rapporteur, and encouraged the High Commissioner, within her mandate, to take into account reports in that regard in the context for her activities to promote and protect human rights, with a view to preventing the occurrence and recurrence of human rights violations; expressed once again its concern at the inadequate resources, both human and material, provided to the Special Rapporteur, and accordingly reiterated its request to the Secretary-General to provide the assistance necessary to the Special Rapporteur to fulfil his mandate effectively, in particular by placing adequate human and material resources at his disposal.
Regarding a resolution on human rights in the administration of justice, in particular, juvenile justice (E/CN.4/2000/L.49), adopted by consensus, the Commission reaffirmed the importance of the full and effective implementation of all United Nations standards on human rights in the administration of justice; reiterated its call to all Member States to spare no effort in providing for effective legislative and other mechanisms and procedures, as well as adequate resources, to ensure the full implementation of those standards; appealed to Governments to include in their national development plans the administration of justice as an integral part of the development process and to allocate adequate resources for the provision of legal-aid services with a view to the promotion and protection of human rights; and invited Governments to provide training, including gender-sensitive training, in human rights and in the administration of justice, including juvenile justice, to all judges, lawyers, prosecutors, social worker, immigration and police officers, and other professional concerned, including personnel employed in internal field presences.
The Commission also stressed the special need for national capacity-building in the field of the administration of justice, in particular to establish and maintain stable societies and the rule of law in post-conflict situations, through reform of the judiciary, the police and the penal system, as well as juvenile justice reform; recognized that every child and juvenile in conflict with the law should be treated in a manner consistent with his or her dignity and needs, in accordance with the relevant principles and provisions embodied in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and other relevant standards on human rights in the administration of justice; took note of the concern of the Committee on the Rights of the Child that in all regions of the world and in relation to all legal systems the provision of the Convention on the Rights of the Child relating to the administration of juvenile justice were in many instance not reflected in national legislation or practice; recognized the necessity of ensuring effective implementation of the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and international standards relating to juvenile justice and invites States to improve the status of information on the situation of juvenile justice to that end; and underlines that raising awareness of the specific situation of children and juveniles in the administration of justice and providing training thereon were crucial in strengthening the implementation of international standards in that field and, in this regard, welcomed the finalization and dissemination of a training manual on juvenile justice, entitled "The child criminal justice manual".
In a resolution on the incompatibility between democracy and racism (E/CN.4/2000/L.50), adopted by consensus, the Commission urged States to reinforce their commitment to promote tolerance and to fight racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance as a way to strengthen democracy and transparent and accountable governance; and invited the mechanisms of the Commission on Human Rights and the treaty bodies, in particular the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination and related intolerance, to continue to pay particular attention to violations of human rights stemming from the rise of racism and xenophobia in political circles and society at large, especially with regards to their incompatibility with democracy.
HAROLD KOH (the United States) said the resolution on the compatibility of democracy and racism was an important component of the Commission's work to promote universal human rights. The resolution highlighted the obligation of democratic governments to combat racism. The United States was deeply committed to this effort and was pleased to cosponsor the resolution.
In a consensus resolution on the right to restitution, compensation and rehabilitation for victims of grave violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms (E/CN.4/2000/.L.51), the Commission called upon the international community to give due attention to the rights to restitution, compensation and rehabilitation for victims of grave violations of human rights; requested the Secretary-General to circulate to all Members States the text of the "Basic principles and guidelines on the right to a remedy and reparation for victims of violations of international human rights and humanitarian law", annexed to the final report of the Independent Expert and to request that they send their comments thereon to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights; and requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to hold a consultative meeting in Geneva for all interested Governments, intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations, using available resources, with a view to finalizing the principles and guidelines on the basis of the comments submitted.
In a resolution on the Independence and impartiality of the judiciary, jurors and assessors and the independence of lawyers (E/CN.4/2000/L.53), the Commission welcomed the numerous exchanges the Special Rapporteur had had with several intergovernmental and international organizations and United Nations bodies, and encouraged him to continue along that path; noted with appreciation the determination of the Special Rapporteur to achieve as wide a dissemination as possible of information about existing standards relating to the independence and impartiality of the judiciary and the independence of the legal profession in conjunction with the publications and promotional activities of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights; invited the High Commissioner to continue to provide technical assistance to train judges and lawyers and to associate the Special Rapporteur in the elaboration of a manual on the training of judges and lawyers in the field of human rights; urged all Governments to assist the Special Rapporteur in the discharge of his mandate and to transmit to him all the information requested; encouraged Governments that face difficulties in guaranteeing the independence of judges and lawyers, or that were determined to take measures to implement those principles further, to consult and to consider the services of the Special Rapporteur, for instance by inviting him to their country if the Government concerned deem it necessary; decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur for that further period of three years, requests him to submit a report on the activities relating to his mandate to the Commission at its fifty-seventh session and decides to consider this question at that session; requests the Secretary-General, within the limits of the United Nations regular budget, to provide the Special Rapporteur with any assistance needed for the discharge of his mandate.
In a resolution on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (E/CN.4/2000/l.54), the Commission called upon all Governments to implement fully the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; urged all Governments to promote the speedy and full implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action relating to freedom from torture, in which it was stated that States should abrogate legislation leading to impunity for those responsible for grave violations of human rights such as torture and prosecute such violations, thereby providing a firm basis for the rule of law; reminded Governments that corporal punishment, including of children could amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or even to torture;
It condemned all forms of torture, including through intimidation, as described in article 1 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; and reminded all States that prolonged incommunicado detention might facilitate the perpetration of torture and could in itself constitute a form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and urged all States to respect the safeguards concerning the liberty, security and dignity of the person.
Further, the Commission urged all States to become parties to the Convention against Torture as a matter of priority; and emphasized the obligation of States parties under article 10 of the Convention against Torture to ensure education and training for persons who might be involved in the custody, interrogation or treatment of any individual subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment. It appealed to all Governments, organizations and individuals to contribute annually to the Board of Trustees of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture and, if possible with a substantial increase in the contributions in order to take into consideration the ever-increasing requests for assistance.
CORRIGENDUM
In press release HR/CN/00/45 of 14 April, the statement of the International Federation of Rural Adult Catholics on page 10 should read as follows:
PIERRE MIOT, of the International Federation of Rural Adult Catholics, said that the appropriation of traditional wisdom by transnational companies was dishonest. This practice sometimes involved the confiscation of living materials, particularly in Latin America, Africa and Asia in regions of environmental biodiversity. According to the law, only inventions could be given patents. As often noted by indigenous leaders, no one could claim for themselves what already existed in nature. African countries had taken the initiative to declare opposition to the patenting of living organism. This battle was difficult to fight due to the intellectual property rights and appropriation by agro-industrial firms or pharmaceuticals. It was necessary to remember four points, the importance of the Convention on biological biodiversity, that WIPO should protect the know how of indigenous peoples, to have the prior consent of indigenous people and provide for equitable division of benefits, and the conformity of national legislation to avoid transnational companies taking advantage of legal loopholes. The genetic world heritage was not subject to trade.
In press release HE/CN/00/55 of 19 April 2000, the statement of Amnesty International on page 5 should read as follows:
YVONNE TERLINGEN, of Amnesty International, also speaking on behalf of Human Rights Watch, said the report had not provided an adequate response to the serious problems faced by many Special Rapporteurs, such as the lack of adequate support from the United Nations and lack of effective cooperation from many States. The Working Group's proposals on States' cooperation with special procedures lacked substance. The Commission should call upon all States to extend open invitations to special procedures to visit their countries at the start of Commission sessions, and ensure that the UN Secretary-General was informed of any State that persistently refused to cooperate with special procedures.
The Commission should create adequate time and space for a thorough discussion during its sessions of special procedures' reports. The Commission should also ask the High Commissioner to provide an assessment of the resource requirements for professional long-term support for special procedures and urge its member States to instruct their delegations to vote for the allocation of the necessary resources from the regular budget.
* *** *