Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Commission on Human Rights
Default title
28 March 2000
Share
Commission on Human Rights
56th session
28 March 2000
Morning
Debate Continues on Right to Development
The Minister for Higher Education of Tunisia and the Deputy Minister of Justice of Vietnam addressed the Commission on Human Rights this morning. The Commission also carried on with its debate on the right to development.
The Tunisian Minister, Sadok Chaabane, told the Commission about national efforts to strengthen women's rights, combat religious extremism, alleviate poverty, and increase employment. He warned against 'general' development approaches by the international community, saying efforts had to be country-specific and not prefabricated.
The Vietnamese official, Ha Hung Cuong, said, among other things, that the country had focused on establishing and enhancing its legal system so that it bolstered human rights and freedoms; in recent years, for the first time, the National Assembly had adopted a Civil Code, a law on enterprises, a commercial law, a trade-union law, a Criminal Procedures Code, and a law on education. A new Penal Code would take effect on 1 July, he said.
Discussion on the right to development echoed themes voiced Monday and in previous years. A series of countries -- Malaysia, Egypt, Iran, Algeria, Paraguay, Uruguay, Eritrea, and South Africa among them -- described national efforts to spur development, said more had to be done to enhance it, and said in several cases that without development the poorer nations of the world had scant hope of providing their populations with the full slate of human rights. Egypt stressed that countries were entitled to choose different paths of development, and Malaysia said it could be misleading to compare one country to another. A representative of Iran said that a handful of developed countries was deciding crucial macro-economic and monetary policies which had far-reaching impact on developing countries, while Paraguay said trade barriers set up in richer regions of the world were unfair and damaging to less-wealthy nations.
Representatives of Jordan, the Netherlands, and Yemen also spoke during the morning meeting, and the following non-governmental organizations delivered statements: the International Federation of Rural Adult Catholic Movements; Earth-Justice Legal Defense Fund; Human Rights Advocates; North-South XXI; Franciscans International; the Association of World Citizens; the Society for Threatened Peoples; the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions; Centre Europe -- Tiers Monde; Pax Romana; Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University; the Organization for Defending Victims of Violence; the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions; and Liberation.
The Commission will reconvene at 3 p.m. for an extended meeting during which it will conclude its debate on the right to development and will start its consideration of the question of the violation of human rights in the occupied Arab territories, including Palestine. The Commission will adjourn as late as 9 p.m.
Statements
HA HUNG CUONG, Deputy Minister of Justice of Vietnam, said that despite difficulties left by the war in Vietnam, the country had focused on establishing and enhancing its legal system so that it bolstered human rights and freedoms; in recent years, for the first time, the National Assembly had adopted a Civil Code, a law on enterprises, a commercial law, a trade-union law, a Criminal Procedures Code, and a law on education, as well as a new Penal Code which would take effect on 1 July. One crucial aspect of ensuring the effectiveness of the legal system was to enhance grassroots democratic participation, and to that end the Government had adopted a national programme of legal education for the public.
The right to development was deemed vital by the Vietnamese people, especially after so many years of war. Vietnam considered economic development to be the prerequisite for the implementation of social policy, the Deputy Minister said. Although it was a low-income country which had to assist millions of war victims, Vietnam had always attached great importance to poverty alleviation, giving it the highest priority and allocating within a restricted budget some 20 per cent of expenditures to social development. The number of poor had been reduced from 30 per cent in 1992 to 15.7 per cent in 1998; Vietnam also was one of 38 countries to adopt a separate national programme on hunger eradication and poverty reduction. In addition, the literacy rate had risen to 93 per cent and the average life expectancy was now 66.
Vietnam believed that striving for the enhancement of human rights was a constant and long-term task of every nation, Mr. Cuong said. All countries should seek to accomplish it, and it was important that every Government always uphold its human-rights objectives and pursue consistent policies towards that goal.
SADOK CHAABANE, Minister for Higher Education of Tunisia, said that for ten years, his country had undertaken steps to create an enabling environment characterized by social calm and sustainable development. The path to liberalization was planned on a political and economic basis. Tunisia had been a precursor in this field, as it believed that freedom was needed for fulfilment of the right to development and political and economic independence.
The Tunisian Government had been prepared to ward off upheavals and had marched ahead to modernization and tolerance despite fanatism and extremism. Women's rights had been strengthened, the legal age for marriage had been raised and divorce was allowed. Tunisia had also fought successfully against religious extremist movements. The Government was attempting to eliminate pockets of poverty through action for the development and training of the Tunisian population. Employment was a priority for the President, as was the combat against marginalization and precariousness. Tunisia called for increased international solidarities. This was not a lofty commitment as the Tunisian President had made an appeal to governments and international institutions for an International Solidarity Fund, which could promote an awareness about development. Mr. Chaabane warned against general development approaches there had to be county-specific and not pre-fabricated models. He also appealed to the other delegations, urging vigilance as extremism could profit from transitional periods.
Laws had been enacted concerning political parties, government associations, and electoral law in Tunisia, the Minister said. There were currently seven political parties. A Code for Children had been established to prevent their exploitation, and new educational programmes promoted agreement and understanding between religions and the principles of human rights. Tunisia's new economy would be free and globalized. Tunisia had made progress in the building of a democracy but there was still a long road ahead. Tunisia would put all its effort in combatting the evils that assailed the world and all parties should enshrine the noble values of human rights.
HASNUDIN HAMZAH (Malaysia) said that one could argue that the Commission on Human Rights was in a transitional stage in its approach to the right to development, between the age of rhetoric and operationalism of the right. There would always be room for some rhetoric, as long as there was deprivation, voices needed to be raised. The trend to establish indicators to monitor the fulfilment of economic, social and cultural rights generally, and the right to development especially, was seen as an interesting phenomena. To a certain extent, this phenomena was inevitable since the adoption of the Declaration on the Right to Development made the international community question whether the primary objective of economic activity was to improve economic and financial indicators. Human beings were at the centre of economic activity, the subjects and principle beneficiaries of development.
The indicators related to the right to development could be useful but should not be used to compare one country against others. Situations differed greatly in different countries. This had been recognized already in 1981 in a study by a UN Special Rapporteur on the right to development, who stressed that development could only be defined in a specific context and based on popular participation. The Malaysian Government had recently published a report entitled 'The Malaysian quality of life' and the selection of indicators in the report was based on their importance, how best they reflected a particular area and the availability of data, which also could be used as a good indicator of the realization of the right to development. The responsibility of the realization of the right to development was shared between individuals, Governments, and international organizations. The participation of non-governmental organizations was particularly encouraged.
FAYZA ABOUL NAGA (Egypt) hoped the developed countries would take more interest in the right to development of the developing countries. Referring to the statement of the representative of the World Bank who said that the Bank was caring for the poor, she said Egypt welcomed that statement. Delegations should cooperate with the Chairperson of the Working Group on the right to development. The process of globalization had become more and more an obstacle to the realization of the right to development of many developing countries. In addition, the debt payment was also another problem faced by those countries that were striving to develop their respective nations.
FARHAD MAMDOUHI (Iran) said that except for on-and-off references and regular affirmations, there had been little progress in the implementation of the Declaration on the Right to Development. Although it had been recognized and accepted as universal and inalienable, it was still far from being realized. Human development was the collective responsibility of the entire community of nations, yet at present a handful of developed countries were deciding crucial macro-economic and monetary policies which had far-reaching impacts on developing countries without any participation of the latter in the process.
One obstacle to development was the transboundary effect of unilateral coercive measures, policies and practices on the economies, development, and human rights of some countries, by people in other countries. Regrettably, at present certain countries were using their predominant position in the world economy to intensify extra-territorial application of domestic legislation against developing countries. This was in clear contravention of international law and should be stopped. Iran welcomed the proposal for a forum on the right to development.
MOHAMED BENCHERIF (Algeria) that said in looking at the right to development, one had to bear in mind the stark conclusions of the United Nations Development Programme's Human Development Report which stated that 1 billion people were not even near the right to development, lacking access to education and health care, including working children. This showed the scope of the phenomenon of under-development. The adoption in 1986 of the right to development and the Vienna Declaration described this right as a fundamental part of human rights. Unfortunately no notable progress had been made, in fact the gap between developed and developing countries was widening every year. The elimination of this gap should be a world priority.
There was a need for international solidarity. It was not a coincidence that many of the suffering countries had been colonialised. These countries had the right to call for solidarity. This cooperation should be effective and harmonious. Globalization had not led to similar progress for humankind as a whole. The fault line between developed and underdeveloped countries had increased due to the lack of courageous actions. Policies on the global level needed to be reevaluated. The south had to be helped in overcoming under-development. A new solidarity was to be based on the equality of rights and a constructive dialogue between the north and the south. Structural adjustment, access to technological advances and the global economic system also needed to be addressed.
LUIS RAMIREZ BOETTNER (Paraguay) said after the turmoil of the Second World War, the international community had adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Right which was complemented by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. However, the lack of resources had placed many developing countries in the position where they were now found. Paraguay was not different: its land-locked geographical situation and the lack of resources had been hampering its realization of the right to development. International assistance, such as the 0.7 per cent of the gross national product of the developed countries, was no more reaching the developing countries. Their agricultural products which were supposed to have access to the free international market had been met with difficulties. International solidarity was still essential for the developing nations to grow and realize their right to development.
CARLOS SCARBI (Uruguay) reaffirmed his country's full commitment to the right to development and supported the priority given to this right by the Secretary- General in his reform programme. Multilateral treatment of this topic was highly recommended. Uruguay hoped the Working Group could reach a consensus so that its substantive work could begin. Interdependence meant there was a need to cooperate and establish a dialogue between the Commission and international financial institutions. The international financial institutions had led to the limitation of the development process.
Uruguay had undertaken national measures with regard to the right to development. The efforts made by the country in the fields of health and education were highlighted. Educational reform had brought thousands of children into the initial education system which had led to the increase in registration of students. Health services received 10 per cent of Uruguay's GDP, which had led to the reduction of infant mortality and an increase in life expectancy. It was important for the fulfilment of the right to development to address the situation of multilateral trade.
KEVIN BRENNAN (South Africa) said that the right to development remained one of the most polarized of human rights. Rightly or wrongly, it had been the subject of tension between the north and south. The result had been that very little implementation of that important right had been achieved, and it thus remained very much a conceptual and theoretical right. The right to development was an over-arching right, forming the nexus between all economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights. It transcended other rights, ensuring that individuals were enabled to move from being subjects, to being citizens able to make choices. South Africa, with international assistance, had embarked on its post-apartheid reconstruction and development programme from 1995, in a conscious effort to ensure that each citizen was able to enjoy all of his or her human rights, through a programme of development which redressed the social and economic imbalance inherited from the old order and which still existed in the country.
SHEHAB MADI (Jordan) said the right to development should not be used to justify non-implementation of other rights, but the right was a vital part of all human rights, and was critical for enhancing them. All people of the world were entitled to development. An adequate structure must be found to implement it. Increased employment, poverty reduction, and social integration would be aided by greater and more effective development. Jordan stressed that the State, in the end, was the entity most responsible for setting priorities for development, but the State, to accomplish this task, needed to work effectively with civil society, the international community, and other actors in the field.
One of the main obstacles to the implementation of the right to development was the burden of debt, which jeopardized social structures within a State; too often restructuring programmes did not take into account negative impacts on vulnerable sectors of the population over the near- and middle terms. Sustainable development needed greater attention; instruments devised to date often did not pay enough attention to sustainability. The Commission could play a role by setting up efficient mechanisms for involving all countries of the world in the effort to implement the right to development.
BAREND VAN DER HEIJDEN (the Netherlands) said his country supported the intervention of Portugal on behalf of the European Union. The Netherlands welcomed the analysis of the Independent Expert on the right to development and commended his views and proposals on that right. The Independent Expert had broken away from old ideas and embraced new ones which was a good basis for progress. The Netherlands agreed with the proposed step-by-step framework which approached development through the access to food, primary education and health care. The Working Group should seriously assess the proposals to see whether they needed to be adjusted, extended or modified. The Netherlands looked forward to more international cooperation, even though it was already very committed to fulfilling the agreement on earmarking 0.7 per cent of GDP for assistance. However, even though assistance was important, it was not the only solution to the right to development.
AMARE TEKLE (Eritrea) said that while it had been repeatedly promised support, international cooperation had not been as forthcoming as it should have been. It was true that conditions beyond the control of African States had had a baneful effect on African development. However, it should be recognized that the root-causes of the development predicaments were found within each African country. In that connection, the primary responsibility to solve the problems lay with African Governments. In addition, armed conflict had been one of the major causes to underdevelopment in the Horn of Africa. For example, one of the States was letting its forests burn with the misguided belief and hope of flushing out anti-government opposition troops. The consequences of the conditions affecting one country would not be confined to that single State but would spill over to its neighbours and would have grave ecological, economic, social and political consequences for the whole region.
AHMED HASSAN (Yemen) said the workshop held on the right to development in Yemen in February was an indication of the importance the country placed on this right. It was to be hoped that international and regional cooperation would result in measures to ensure the real implementation of the decisions and recommendations taken at the workshop. The intent was to limit poverty, improve living standards, and so ensure the realization of a broad slate of human rights, with beneficial results for the political sphere as well.
The High Commissioner for Human Rights had visited Yemen, had met with senior officials in the country and had participated in the opening of the workshop. The visit had had very positive results. Yemen had witnessed important developments in human rights recently, and these events reinforced the trend, although difficulties continued to be encountered in enforcing various economic and human-rights measures because of financial constraints; further international support was needed for Yemen's human-rights programme if it was to be successful.
PIERRE MIOT, of the International Federation of Rural Adult Catholic Movements, said the United Nations Development Programme's report on human development supported the calls from the most vulnerable. A human face to globalization was needed. Actors involved in the realization of the right to development had a responsibility to respond to basic needs of rural populations before responding to the needs of the market. Civil society was trying to control the ravages caused by globalization. Many issues had to be addressed like transnational cooperation and genetically modified foods. Economists were challenged, world public opinion did not want to be left out.
Agriculture was a source of disagreement as it had been at the World Trade Organization summit in Seattle. The market rationale that had taken over and crushed small producers was no longer acceptable. The Federation urged the Commission to ensure sovereignty of States' policies on the right to development, assess WTO policies since the Uruguay Round, ensure that States took steps to respond to the demands of civil society, prevent developing countries from being left out in debates and ensure that trade was subjected to international law.
YVES LADOR, of the Earth-Justice Legal Defence Fund, said the right to development had been and remained one of the most challenging questions in the field of human rights. On the one hand, the wealthiest countries showed a lack of any real political will to carry out all the needed efforts to help the poorer overcome poverty and rise to their level of strength and well-being. The wealthy countries continued to concentrate on power and wealth. That left millions of people in a daily struggle for survival and without any future. Development projects could become tools for the violations of the human rights of the most vulnerable by increasing poverty rather than alleviating it. In India, in the Narmada Valley, the construction of dams had cause the displacement of 100,000 persons without real appropriate resettlement. The construction of the Sarda Sarovar would also displace another 200,000 people. The victims would lose their property, their livelihood and their living resources.
REBECCA THORNTON, of Human Rights Advocates, said many human rights could unfortunately be damaged by pursuit of the right to development, as when development projects had negative environmental effects. When environmental damage occurred, the health and welfare of individuals was compromised; impacts were especially severe on poor populations who depended on natural resources for survival. When such populations objected to environmental degradation of their lands and asserted their right to participate in Government, they often were silenced by torture, arbitrary detention and extra-judicial killings. Progress had been made by the Bretton Woods institutions and other United Nations bodies, but more needed to be done to integrate considerations of the environment and human rights.
Measurements of Gross National Product often were misleading because they did not take account of widening disparities in income -- a trend that had to be reversed. Human Rights Advocates supported suggestions that the World Bank and regional banks focused their loans on projects that would help alleviate poverty in the world's poorest nations. The mandate of the Special Rapporteur on illicit movement and dumping of toxic waste should be expanded to include issues of human rights and the environment more broadly and perhaps a Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment should be appointed.
JOAQUIN MBOMIO, of North-South XXI, said the United Nations Development Programme's report highlighted the right to health, food, housing and education which made it impossible to dissociate various categories of human rights with the right to development. Equitable distribution of wealth would be a positive basic solution to the right to development. The report showed the need to transform the results of the Vienna Declaration and the Copenhagen summit into binding regulations. Today's society was compared to that in the nineteenth century when human suffering was created by the industrial revolution.
Increased political will was encouraged as the relegation of the right to development to the backburner was not acceptable. The data provided by UNDP had to be included in basic working documents of the Commission and Governments. The right to development had not only been rejected for the south but had been based on more and more contested criteria by the developed countries. The rationale of the movement of globalization could only increase the phenomenon of pseudo-development where only some profited; at the same time, the environment was destroyed and people were suffering. The Commission should struggle for a comprehensive approach to development.
JOHN QUIGLEY, of Franciscans International, said that his organization, in collaboration with the Dominicans for Justice and Peace and the Lutheran World Federation, had hosted a seminar on the practical challenges of implementing the right to development. The seminar, which took place from 7 to 8 September 1999, served as an informal brainstorming session in a relaxed atmosphere to assist the diplomatic community with insights from the experiences of various experts in development from different countries. The results of the seminar were positive and provided a creative opportunity for non-governmental organizations to facilitate a difficult but fruitful discussion within the UN community. There was a clear and critical need for the participation of the intended beneficiaries in the planning and operationalism of any development project. Operationalism of the right to development could not be reduced to talk about economic assistance. The international community needed to address new, creative and practical ways to finance the needed programmes to help individuals, nations and regions to develop their potential.
RENE WADLOW, of the Association of World Citizens, said the Commission had come a long way from the start of its work on the right to development in 1979, with its consideration of a report of the Secretary-General that linked development, among other things, to peace. Since then the right to peace had been exiled to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and was rarely heard about, while the term New International Economic Order had been dropped so that rich States would participate fully in the drafting of the Declaration on the Right to Development.
Now it was time to move beyond the conceptual stage to the implementation of this right. The Independent Expert on the right to development had made a number of proposals, including suggestions that food, primary health, primary education, and the use of 'solidarity contracts' be focused on. The Association was convinced that his proposals were feasible and valuable. Meanwhile, a confederation of groups had arisen and had demonstrated at the World Trade Organization conference in Seattle and elsewhere, motivated by a sense that economic and social trends were out of democratic control and that huge but hidden interests manipulated the world economy. Unless senior figures in the human-rights community could provide effective leadership showing that open, democratic structures were being put in place to achieve the right to development, that angry confederation would grow.
ESTER JUSUF, of the Society for Threatened Peoples, said that the question of the right to development was not only an issue of individual economic well-being but also that of collective development as in the case of different ethnic minorities in Sudan. For more than 30 years those minorities had lived in an area of civil war where they experienced hunger and genocide. Since August 1999, oil was drilled from that area with the participation of the people living in the region. Instead of building hospitals, schools and roads in the region, people were arbitrarily killed, and women and children were abducted and forced into slavery. The Government of Khartoum, in alliance with international oil companies, prevented a whole region from the slightest chance for development.
LEILANI FARHA, of the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions, said millions of people across the globe were being evicted from their homes and lands, first of all by armed conflict; women and children were the most numerous victims. They also suffered most often from evictions because of development projects, city beautification schemes, and international events and conferences. Millions of them also lived in adequate housing, lacking such necessities as clean water and proper sewage systems; and widows, single mothers, and divorced or separated women were often rendered homeless and landless because of gender-biased laws, policies, customs, and traditions, while many others were forced to remain in conditions of domestic violence for lack of humane alternatives.
When women's housing rights were violated, so was their right to development. The Commission should adopt the draft resolution on women and the right to land, property and housing; and it should appoint a Special Rapporteur on housing rights with a strong mandate. All Governments should review their laws, policies, customs, and traditions and reform them so that they did not discriminate against women or deny women security of tenure.
MALIK OZDEN, of the Centre Europe-Tiers Monde, speaking also on behalf of the Mouvement contre le racism et pour l'amitie entre les peoples, said that neo-liberal policies continued to be presented as the only means to achieve development. The gaps between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' were increasing as demonstrated in the United Nations Development Proramme's Human Development Report. Measures needed to be taken. The report of the Independent Expert did not match the issues at stake. There was insufficient structural and systemic analysis. The collective dimension of the right to development was ignored. There was no political strategy mentioned and no mention of what kind of strategy would be required to promote the right to development.
The association was not trying to demonize any particular group. The economic system had to be addressed. How could competition, profit and the principles of market economy have been transformed into an absolute rule. The step-by-step approach consisting of food, health and education was described as a special category of rights. The rights of a community as such had to be explicitly worked on. Communities had the right to chose which strategy and the orientation thereof for the promotion of the right to development. The social and political context had to be recognized, on an international and national level.
JERALD JOSEPH, of Pax Romana, said he regretted that little progress had been made since the Copenhagen Summit in 1995. The debt burden would always weigh down nations' potential for development and growth. Ironically, it was those very loans that should have propelled States into a more prosperous economy. Nearly 700 million people in 41 highly indebted poor countries faced a debt burden of $ 221 billion. Together with debt cancellation, new mechanisms of financing for development had to be studied as many nations would still need money to propel their economies. Essentially, the right to development involved the financial means to realize development. The world was not short of cash: a total of $ 890 billion from private capital had flown into the emerging markets selectively. The Commission should recognize more explicitly the positive role of non-governmental organizations in implementing the right to development both nationally and internationally, in the formulation of a resolution on the item.
THERESA KLEIN, of Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University, said the right to development was an integral part of the right to life, but today's society, based on production, profit, and competition, promoted an attitude which excluded large sectors of society. It would be harmful not to create an equilibrium of initiatives and creativity among all actors in the system so that a culture of peace was established; such a development would be more than a gesture of love --- it would be a deep recognition of the laws of creation.
In an age of communication and globalization, cooperation, solidarity and brotherhood was required from all. Brahma Kumaris had for more than 60 years encouraged personal development of consciousness based on the recognition of one's own inner values and qualities; it used a simple form of personal reflection accessible to all. It was everyone's responsibility, including Governments, to guarantee the right to development to every individual, including the most impoverished.
SAEID NESHAT, of the Organization for Defending Victims of Violence, said the right to development was an inalienable and universal right and required more attention from the international community as well as effective mechanisms guaranteeing a better future for all nations and peoples. The memorandum of understanding signed between the United Nations Development Programme and the High Commissioner for Human Rights was welcomed as a step in the right direction. The aggravation of conflicts and violence, marginalization, instability and serious environmental issues should be a high priority on the agenda.
The transfer of scientific know-how and technology and the removal of economic sanctions were encouraged so as to facilitate the path to the right to development. Substantial funds should be collected for development. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund should sensitise their approach to development and should consider the need to provide urgent and unconditional financial support. A cultural environment promoting development was recommended, where the human being was reminded of the value of humanity and could renounce excessive materialism.
MARIE-THERESE BELLAMY, of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, observed that although some countries which had been affected by the Asian crisis were starting to show positive growth, and although some Latin American nations were not as seriously affected by economic problems as previously expected, it should not be concluded that the world was entering an age of prosperity. Many regions of the world were still trapped by poverty without any perspective of improvement. Prosperity was in fact unequally divided and remained fragile. The United States was planning to increase its interest rate to slow down consumption while half of the world's population lived on $ 2 per day. The Confederation was happy to see that the reduction of poverty had been the major theme of the international community for some time. It would also be debated by the Commission during the current session and it had been mentioned in the statements of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
RUBINA SHAIKH GREENWOOD, of Liberation, said powerful economic States were using their strength to hinder the development of poorer economies or were increasing their own economic strength by the use of extortionate interest rates on foreign debt. Where there were differences in political systems, stronger economies were resorting to economic forms of blackmail such as the use of trade embargoes. Some States were using similar methods to impose their own conformity on cultural diversity within their own communities.
More progress must be made on writing off foreign debt. Despite UN resolutions declaring it illegal, the economic embargo of Cuba continued. Liberation was concerned at the proposed development of the Illisu dam on the Tigris River in Turkey, which would destroy a Kurdish town and drown the surrounding countryside and villages as well as affect the water supply to Iraq. The recent deaths of more than 350 people in the Thar, a desert region of Sindh, Pakistan, illustrated the great need for better development of areas of Sindh; the proposed Kalabagh dam would seriously damage three small Pakistani provinces: Sindh, Balouchistan and NWFP by destroying fertile lands.
*****
56th session
28 March 2000
Morning
Debate Continues on Right to Development
The Minister for Higher Education of Tunisia and the Deputy Minister of Justice of Vietnam addressed the Commission on Human Rights this morning. The Commission also carried on with its debate on the right to development.
The Tunisian Minister, Sadok Chaabane, told the Commission about national efforts to strengthen women's rights, combat religious extremism, alleviate poverty, and increase employment. He warned against 'general' development approaches by the international community, saying efforts had to be country-specific and not prefabricated.
The Vietnamese official, Ha Hung Cuong, said, among other things, that the country had focused on establishing and enhancing its legal system so that it bolstered human rights and freedoms; in recent years, for the first time, the National Assembly had adopted a Civil Code, a law on enterprises, a commercial law, a trade-union law, a Criminal Procedures Code, and a law on education. A new Penal Code would take effect on 1 July, he said.
Discussion on the right to development echoed themes voiced Monday and in previous years. A series of countries -- Malaysia, Egypt, Iran, Algeria, Paraguay, Uruguay, Eritrea, and South Africa among them -- described national efforts to spur development, said more had to be done to enhance it, and said in several cases that without development the poorer nations of the world had scant hope of providing their populations with the full slate of human rights. Egypt stressed that countries were entitled to choose different paths of development, and Malaysia said it could be misleading to compare one country to another. A representative of Iran said that a handful of developed countries was deciding crucial macro-economic and monetary policies which had far-reaching impact on developing countries, while Paraguay said trade barriers set up in richer regions of the world were unfair and damaging to less-wealthy nations.
Representatives of Jordan, the Netherlands, and Yemen also spoke during the morning meeting, and the following non-governmental organizations delivered statements: the International Federation of Rural Adult Catholic Movements; Earth-Justice Legal Defense Fund; Human Rights Advocates; North-South XXI; Franciscans International; the Association of World Citizens; the Society for Threatened Peoples; the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions; Centre Europe -- Tiers Monde; Pax Romana; Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University; the Organization for Defending Victims of Violence; the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions; and Liberation.
The Commission will reconvene at 3 p.m. for an extended meeting during which it will conclude its debate on the right to development and will start its consideration of the question of the violation of human rights in the occupied Arab territories, including Palestine. The Commission will adjourn as late as 9 p.m.
Statements
HA HUNG CUONG, Deputy Minister of Justice of Vietnam, said that despite difficulties left by the war in Vietnam, the country had focused on establishing and enhancing its legal system so that it bolstered human rights and freedoms; in recent years, for the first time, the National Assembly had adopted a Civil Code, a law on enterprises, a commercial law, a trade-union law, a Criminal Procedures Code, and a law on education, as well as a new Penal Code which would take effect on 1 July. One crucial aspect of ensuring the effectiveness of the legal system was to enhance grassroots democratic participation, and to that end the Government had adopted a national programme of legal education for the public.
The right to development was deemed vital by the Vietnamese people, especially after so many years of war. Vietnam considered economic development to be the prerequisite for the implementation of social policy, the Deputy Minister said. Although it was a low-income country which had to assist millions of war victims, Vietnam had always attached great importance to poverty alleviation, giving it the highest priority and allocating within a restricted budget some 20 per cent of expenditures to social development. The number of poor had been reduced from 30 per cent in 1992 to 15.7 per cent in 1998; Vietnam also was one of 38 countries to adopt a separate national programme on hunger eradication and poverty reduction. In addition, the literacy rate had risen to 93 per cent and the average life expectancy was now 66.
Vietnam believed that striving for the enhancement of human rights was a constant and long-term task of every nation, Mr. Cuong said. All countries should seek to accomplish it, and it was important that every Government always uphold its human-rights objectives and pursue consistent policies towards that goal.
SADOK CHAABANE, Minister for Higher Education of Tunisia, said that for ten years, his country had undertaken steps to create an enabling environment characterized by social calm and sustainable development. The path to liberalization was planned on a political and economic basis. Tunisia had been a precursor in this field, as it believed that freedom was needed for fulfilment of the right to development and political and economic independence.
The Tunisian Government had been prepared to ward off upheavals and had marched ahead to modernization and tolerance despite fanatism and extremism. Women's rights had been strengthened, the legal age for marriage had been raised and divorce was allowed. Tunisia had also fought successfully against religious extremist movements. The Government was attempting to eliminate pockets of poverty through action for the development and training of the Tunisian population. Employment was a priority for the President, as was the combat against marginalization and precariousness. Tunisia called for increased international solidarities. This was not a lofty commitment as the Tunisian President had made an appeal to governments and international institutions for an International Solidarity Fund, which could promote an awareness about development. Mr. Chaabane warned against general development approaches there had to be county-specific and not pre-fabricated models. He also appealed to the other delegations, urging vigilance as extremism could profit from transitional periods.
Laws had been enacted concerning political parties, government associations, and electoral law in Tunisia, the Minister said. There were currently seven political parties. A Code for Children had been established to prevent their exploitation, and new educational programmes promoted agreement and understanding between religions and the principles of human rights. Tunisia's new economy would be free and globalized. Tunisia had made progress in the building of a democracy but there was still a long road ahead. Tunisia would put all its effort in combatting the evils that assailed the world and all parties should enshrine the noble values of human rights.
HASNUDIN HAMZAH (Malaysia) said that one could argue that the Commission on Human Rights was in a transitional stage in its approach to the right to development, between the age of rhetoric and operationalism of the right. There would always be room for some rhetoric, as long as there was deprivation, voices needed to be raised. The trend to establish indicators to monitor the fulfilment of economic, social and cultural rights generally, and the right to development especially, was seen as an interesting phenomena. To a certain extent, this phenomena was inevitable since the adoption of the Declaration on the Right to Development made the international community question whether the primary objective of economic activity was to improve economic and financial indicators. Human beings were at the centre of economic activity, the subjects and principle beneficiaries of development.
The indicators related to the right to development could be useful but should not be used to compare one country against others. Situations differed greatly in different countries. This had been recognized already in 1981 in a study by a UN Special Rapporteur on the right to development, who stressed that development could only be defined in a specific context and based on popular participation. The Malaysian Government had recently published a report entitled 'The Malaysian quality of life' and the selection of indicators in the report was based on their importance, how best they reflected a particular area and the availability of data, which also could be used as a good indicator of the realization of the right to development. The responsibility of the realization of the right to development was shared between individuals, Governments, and international organizations. The participation of non-governmental organizations was particularly encouraged.
FAYZA ABOUL NAGA (Egypt) hoped the developed countries would take more interest in the right to development of the developing countries. Referring to the statement of the representative of the World Bank who said that the Bank was caring for the poor, she said Egypt welcomed that statement. Delegations should cooperate with the Chairperson of the Working Group on the right to development. The process of globalization had become more and more an obstacle to the realization of the right to development of many developing countries. In addition, the debt payment was also another problem faced by those countries that were striving to develop their respective nations.
FARHAD MAMDOUHI (Iran) said that except for on-and-off references and regular affirmations, there had been little progress in the implementation of the Declaration on the Right to Development. Although it had been recognized and accepted as universal and inalienable, it was still far from being realized. Human development was the collective responsibility of the entire community of nations, yet at present a handful of developed countries were deciding crucial macro-economic and monetary policies which had far-reaching impacts on developing countries without any participation of the latter in the process.
One obstacle to development was the transboundary effect of unilateral coercive measures, policies and practices on the economies, development, and human rights of some countries, by people in other countries. Regrettably, at present certain countries were using their predominant position in the world economy to intensify extra-territorial application of domestic legislation against developing countries. This was in clear contravention of international law and should be stopped. Iran welcomed the proposal for a forum on the right to development.
MOHAMED BENCHERIF (Algeria) that said in looking at the right to development, one had to bear in mind the stark conclusions of the United Nations Development Programme's Human Development Report which stated that 1 billion people were not even near the right to development, lacking access to education and health care, including working children. This showed the scope of the phenomenon of under-development. The adoption in 1986 of the right to development and the Vienna Declaration described this right as a fundamental part of human rights. Unfortunately no notable progress had been made, in fact the gap between developed and developing countries was widening every year. The elimination of this gap should be a world priority.
There was a need for international solidarity. It was not a coincidence that many of the suffering countries had been colonialised. These countries had the right to call for solidarity. This cooperation should be effective and harmonious. Globalization had not led to similar progress for humankind as a whole. The fault line between developed and underdeveloped countries had increased due to the lack of courageous actions. Policies on the global level needed to be reevaluated. The south had to be helped in overcoming under-development. A new solidarity was to be based on the equality of rights and a constructive dialogue between the north and the south. Structural adjustment, access to technological advances and the global economic system also needed to be addressed.
LUIS RAMIREZ BOETTNER (Paraguay) said after the turmoil of the Second World War, the international community had adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Right which was complemented by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. However, the lack of resources had placed many developing countries in the position where they were now found. Paraguay was not different: its land-locked geographical situation and the lack of resources had been hampering its realization of the right to development. International assistance, such as the 0.7 per cent of the gross national product of the developed countries, was no more reaching the developing countries. Their agricultural products which were supposed to have access to the free international market had been met with difficulties. International solidarity was still essential for the developing nations to grow and realize their right to development.
CARLOS SCARBI (Uruguay) reaffirmed his country's full commitment to the right to development and supported the priority given to this right by the Secretary- General in his reform programme. Multilateral treatment of this topic was highly recommended. Uruguay hoped the Working Group could reach a consensus so that its substantive work could begin. Interdependence meant there was a need to cooperate and establish a dialogue between the Commission and international financial institutions. The international financial institutions had led to the limitation of the development process.
Uruguay had undertaken national measures with regard to the right to development. The efforts made by the country in the fields of health and education were highlighted. Educational reform had brought thousands of children into the initial education system which had led to the increase in registration of students. Health services received 10 per cent of Uruguay's GDP, which had led to the reduction of infant mortality and an increase in life expectancy. It was important for the fulfilment of the right to development to address the situation of multilateral trade.
KEVIN BRENNAN (South Africa) said that the right to development remained one of the most polarized of human rights. Rightly or wrongly, it had been the subject of tension between the north and south. The result had been that very little implementation of that important right had been achieved, and it thus remained very much a conceptual and theoretical right. The right to development was an over-arching right, forming the nexus between all economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights. It transcended other rights, ensuring that individuals were enabled to move from being subjects, to being citizens able to make choices. South Africa, with international assistance, had embarked on its post-apartheid reconstruction and development programme from 1995, in a conscious effort to ensure that each citizen was able to enjoy all of his or her human rights, through a programme of development which redressed the social and economic imbalance inherited from the old order and which still existed in the country.
SHEHAB MADI (Jordan) said the right to development should not be used to justify non-implementation of other rights, but the right was a vital part of all human rights, and was critical for enhancing them. All people of the world were entitled to development. An adequate structure must be found to implement it. Increased employment, poverty reduction, and social integration would be aided by greater and more effective development. Jordan stressed that the State, in the end, was the entity most responsible for setting priorities for development, but the State, to accomplish this task, needed to work effectively with civil society, the international community, and other actors in the field.
One of the main obstacles to the implementation of the right to development was the burden of debt, which jeopardized social structures within a State; too often restructuring programmes did not take into account negative impacts on vulnerable sectors of the population over the near- and middle terms. Sustainable development needed greater attention; instruments devised to date often did not pay enough attention to sustainability. The Commission could play a role by setting up efficient mechanisms for involving all countries of the world in the effort to implement the right to development.
BAREND VAN DER HEIJDEN (the Netherlands) said his country supported the intervention of Portugal on behalf of the European Union. The Netherlands welcomed the analysis of the Independent Expert on the right to development and commended his views and proposals on that right. The Independent Expert had broken away from old ideas and embraced new ones which was a good basis for progress. The Netherlands agreed with the proposed step-by-step framework which approached development through the access to food, primary education and health care. The Working Group should seriously assess the proposals to see whether they needed to be adjusted, extended or modified. The Netherlands looked forward to more international cooperation, even though it was already very committed to fulfilling the agreement on earmarking 0.7 per cent of GDP for assistance. However, even though assistance was important, it was not the only solution to the right to development.
AMARE TEKLE (Eritrea) said that while it had been repeatedly promised support, international cooperation had not been as forthcoming as it should have been. It was true that conditions beyond the control of African States had had a baneful effect on African development. However, it should be recognized that the root-causes of the development predicaments were found within each African country. In that connection, the primary responsibility to solve the problems lay with African Governments. In addition, armed conflict had been one of the major causes to underdevelopment in the Horn of Africa. For example, one of the States was letting its forests burn with the misguided belief and hope of flushing out anti-government opposition troops. The consequences of the conditions affecting one country would not be confined to that single State but would spill over to its neighbours and would have grave ecological, economic, social and political consequences for the whole region.
AHMED HASSAN (Yemen) said the workshop held on the right to development in Yemen in February was an indication of the importance the country placed on this right. It was to be hoped that international and regional cooperation would result in measures to ensure the real implementation of the decisions and recommendations taken at the workshop. The intent was to limit poverty, improve living standards, and so ensure the realization of a broad slate of human rights, with beneficial results for the political sphere as well.
The High Commissioner for Human Rights had visited Yemen, had met with senior officials in the country and had participated in the opening of the workshop. The visit had had very positive results. Yemen had witnessed important developments in human rights recently, and these events reinforced the trend, although difficulties continued to be encountered in enforcing various economic and human-rights measures because of financial constraints; further international support was needed for Yemen's human-rights programme if it was to be successful.
PIERRE MIOT, of the International Federation of Rural Adult Catholic Movements, said the United Nations Development Programme's report on human development supported the calls from the most vulnerable. A human face to globalization was needed. Actors involved in the realization of the right to development had a responsibility to respond to basic needs of rural populations before responding to the needs of the market. Civil society was trying to control the ravages caused by globalization. Many issues had to be addressed like transnational cooperation and genetically modified foods. Economists were challenged, world public opinion did not want to be left out.
Agriculture was a source of disagreement as it had been at the World Trade Organization summit in Seattle. The market rationale that had taken over and crushed small producers was no longer acceptable. The Federation urged the Commission to ensure sovereignty of States' policies on the right to development, assess WTO policies since the Uruguay Round, ensure that States took steps to respond to the demands of civil society, prevent developing countries from being left out in debates and ensure that trade was subjected to international law.
YVES LADOR, of the Earth-Justice Legal Defence Fund, said the right to development had been and remained one of the most challenging questions in the field of human rights. On the one hand, the wealthiest countries showed a lack of any real political will to carry out all the needed efforts to help the poorer overcome poverty and rise to their level of strength and well-being. The wealthy countries continued to concentrate on power and wealth. That left millions of people in a daily struggle for survival and without any future. Development projects could become tools for the violations of the human rights of the most vulnerable by increasing poverty rather than alleviating it. In India, in the Narmada Valley, the construction of dams had cause the displacement of 100,000 persons without real appropriate resettlement. The construction of the Sarda Sarovar would also displace another 200,000 people. The victims would lose their property, their livelihood and their living resources.
REBECCA THORNTON, of Human Rights Advocates, said many human rights could unfortunately be damaged by pursuit of the right to development, as when development projects had negative environmental effects. When environmental damage occurred, the health and welfare of individuals was compromised; impacts were especially severe on poor populations who depended on natural resources for survival. When such populations objected to environmental degradation of their lands and asserted their right to participate in Government, they often were silenced by torture, arbitrary detention and extra-judicial killings. Progress had been made by the Bretton Woods institutions and other United Nations bodies, but more needed to be done to integrate considerations of the environment and human rights.
Measurements of Gross National Product often were misleading because they did not take account of widening disparities in income -- a trend that had to be reversed. Human Rights Advocates supported suggestions that the World Bank and regional banks focused their loans on projects that would help alleviate poverty in the world's poorest nations. The mandate of the Special Rapporteur on illicit movement and dumping of toxic waste should be expanded to include issues of human rights and the environment more broadly and perhaps a Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment should be appointed.
JOAQUIN MBOMIO, of North-South XXI, said the United Nations Development Programme's report highlighted the right to health, food, housing and education which made it impossible to dissociate various categories of human rights with the right to development. Equitable distribution of wealth would be a positive basic solution to the right to development. The report showed the need to transform the results of the Vienna Declaration and the Copenhagen summit into binding regulations. Today's society was compared to that in the nineteenth century when human suffering was created by the industrial revolution.
Increased political will was encouraged as the relegation of the right to development to the backburner was not acceptable. The data provided by UNDP had to be included in basic working documents of the Commission and Governments. The right to development had not only been rejected for the south but had been based on more and more contested criteria by the developed countries. The rationale of the movement of globalization could only increase the phenomenon of pseudo-development where only some profited; at the same time, the environment was destroyed and people were suffering. The Commission should struggle for a comprehensive approach to development.
JOHN QUIGLEY, of Franciscans International, said that his organization, in collaboration with the Dominicans for Justice and Peace and the Lutheran World Federation, had hosted a seminar on the practical challenges of implementing the right to development. The seminar, which took place from 7 to 8 September 1999, served as an informal brainstorming session in a relaxed atmosphere to assist the diplomatic community with insights from the experiences of various experts in development from different countries. The results of the seminar were positive and provided a creative opportunity for non-governmental organizations to facilitate a difficult but fruitful discussion within the UN community. There was a clear and critical need for the participation of the intended beneficiaries in the planning and operationalism of any development project. Operationalism of the right to development could not be reduced to talk about economic assistance. The international community needed to address new, creative and practical ways to finance the needed programmes to help individuals, nations and regions to develop their potential.
RENE WADLOW, of the Association of World Citizens, said the Commission had come a long way from the start of its work on the right to development in 1979, with its consideration of a report of the Secretary-General that linked development, among other things, to peace. Since then the right to peace had been exiled to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and was rarely heard about, while the term New International Economic Order had been dropped so that rich States would participate fully in the drafting of the Declaration on the Right to Development.
Now it was time to move beyond the conceptual stage to the implementation of this right. The Independent Expert on the right to development had made a number of proposals, including suggestions that food, primary health, primary education, and the use of 'solidarity contracts' be focused on. The Association was convinced that his proposals were feasible and valuable. Meanwhile, a confederation of groups had arisen and had demonstrated at the World Trade Organization conference in Seattle and elsewhere, motivated by a sense that economic and social trends were out of democratic control and that huge but hidden interests manipulated the world economy. Unless senior figures in the human-rights community could provide effective leadership showing that open, democratic structures were being put in place to achieve the right to development, that angry confederation would grow.
ESTER JUSUF, of the Society for Threatened Peoples, said that the question of the right to development was not only an issue of individual economic well-being but also that of collective development as in the case of different ethnic minorities in Sudan. For more than 30 years those minorities had lived in an area of civil war where they experienced hunger and genocide. Since August 1999, oil was drilled from that area with the participation of the people living in the region. Instead of building hospitals, schools and roads in the region, people were arbitrarily killed, and women and children were abducted and forced into slavery. The Government of Khartoum, in alliance with international oil companies, prevented a whole region from the slightest chance for development.
LEILANI FARHA, of the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions, said millions of people across the globe were being evicted from their homes and lands, first of all by armed conflict; women and children were the most numerous victims. They also suffered most often from evictions because of development projects, city beautification schemes, and international events and conferences. Millions of them also lived in adequate housing, lacking such necessities as clean water and proper sewage systems; and widows, single mothers, and divorced or separated women were often rendered homeless and landless because of gender-biased laws, policies, customs, and traditions, while many others were forced to remain in conditions of domestic violence for lack of humane alternatives.
When women's housing rights were violated, so was their right to development. The Commission should adopt the draft resolution on women and the right to land, property and housing; and it should appoint a Special Rapporteur on housing rights with a strong mandate. All Governments should review their laws, policies, customs, and traditions and reform them so that they did not discriminate against women or deny women security of tenure.
MALIK OZDEN, of the Centre Europe-Tiers Monde, speaking also on behalf of the Mouvement contre le racism et pour l'amitie entre les peoples, said that neo-liberal policies continued to be presented as the only means to achieve development. The gaps between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' were increasing as demonstrated in the United Nations Development Proramme's Human Development Report. Measures needed to be taken. The report of the Independent Expert did not match the issues at stake. There was insufficient structural and systemic analysis. The collective dimension of the right to development was ignored. There was no political strategy mentioned and no mention of what kind of strategy would be required to promote the right to development.
The association was not trying to demonize any particular group. The economic system had to be addressed. How could competition, profit and the principles of market economy have been transformed into an absolute rule. The step-by-step approach consisting of food, health and education was described as a special category of rights. The rights of a community as such had to be explicitly worked on. Communities had the right to chose which strategy and the orientation thereof for the promotion of the right to development. The social and political context had to be recognized, on an international and national level.
JERALD JOSEPH, of Pax Romana, said he regretted that little progress had been made since the Copenhagen Summit in 1995. The debt burden would always weigh down nations' potential for development and growth. Ironically, it was those very loans that should have propelled States into a more prosperous economy. Nearly 700 million people in 41 highly indebted poor countries faced a debt burden of $ 221 billion. Together with debt cancellation, new mechanisms of financing for development had to be studied as many nations would still need money to propel their economies. Essentially, the right to development involved the financial means to realize development. The world was not short of cash: a total of $ 890 billion from private capital had flown into the emerging markets selectively. The Commission should recognize more explicitly the positive role of non-governmental organizations in implementing the right to development both nationally and internationally, in the formulation of a resolution on the item.
THERESA KLEIN, of Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University, said the right to development was an integral part of the right to life, but today's society, based on production, profit, and competition, promoted an attitude which excluded large sectors of society. It would be harmful not to create an equilibrium of initiatives and creativity among all actors in the system so that a culture of peace was established; such a development would be more than a gesture of love --- it would be a deep recognition of the laws of creation.
In an age of communication and globalization, cooperation, solidarity and brotherhood was required from all. Brahma Kumaris had for more than 60 years encouraged personal development of consciousness based on the recognition of one's own inner values and qualities; it used a simple form of personal reflection accessible to all. It was everyone's responsibility, including Governments, to guarantee the right to development to every individual, including the most impoverished.
SAEID NESHAT, of the Organization for Defending Victims of Violence, said the right to development was an inalienable and universal right and required more attention from the international community as well as effective mechanisms guaranteeing a better future for all nations and peoples. The memorandum of understanding signed between the United Nations Development Programme and the High Commissioner for Human Rights was welcomed as a step in the right direction. The aggravation of conflicts and violence, marginalization, instability and serious environmental issues should be a high priority on the agenda.
The transfer of scientific know-how and technology and the removal of economic sanctions were encouraged so as to facilitate the path to the right to development. Substantial funds should be collected for development. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund should sensitise their approach to development and should consider the need to provide urgent and unconditional financial support. A cultural environment promoting development was recommended, where the human being was reminded of the value of humanity and could renounce excessive materialism.
MARIE-THERESE BELLAMY, of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, observed that although some countries which had been affected by the Asian crisis were starting to show positive growth, and although some Latin American nations were not as seriously affected by economic problems as previously expected, it should not be concluded that the world was entering an age of prosperity. Many regions of the world were still trapped by poverty without any perspective of improvement. Prosperity was in fact unequally divided and remained fragile. The United States was planning to increase its interest rate to slow down consumption while half of the world's population lived on $ 2 per day. The Confederation was happy to see that the reduction of poverty had been the major theme of the international community for some time. It would also be debated by the Commission during the current session and it had been mentioned in the statements of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
RUBINA SHAIKH GREENWOOD, of Liberation, said powerful economic States were using their strength to hinder the development of poorer economies or were increasing their own economic strength by the use of extortionate interest rates on foreign debt. Where there were differences in political systems, stronger economies were resorting to economic forms of blackmail such as the use of trade embargoes. Some States were using similar methods to impose their own conformity on cultural diversity within their own communities.
More progress must be made on writing off foreign debt. Despite UN resolutions declaring it illegal, the economic embargo of Cuba continued. Liberation was concerned at the proposed development of the Illisu dam on the Tigris River in Turkey, which would destroy a Kurdish town and drown the surrounding countryside and villages as well as affect the water supply to Iraq. The recent deaths of more than 350 people in the Thar, a desert region of Sindh, Pakistan, illustrated the great need for better development of areas of Sindh; the proposed Kalabagh dam would seriously damage three small Pakistani provinces: Sindh, Balouchistan and NWFP by destroying fertile lands.
*****