Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Multiple Mechanisms
Default title
27 March 2000
Share
Commission on Human Rights
56th session
27 March 2000
Morning
Hears Statements by Foreign Ministers of Finland, Spain, Denmark, Albania
And Member of European Commission
The Commission on Human Rights this morning started its debate on the right to development by hearing its Independent Expert on the subject, Arjun Sengupta, say that the right to development had been defined as an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human being and all peoples were entitled to enjoy economic, social, cultural, civil and political development so that all human rights and fundamental freedoms could be fully realized.
The Commission was also addressed by the Foreign Ministers of Finland, Spain, Denmark, Albania and by a member of the European Commission.
Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja stated that problems related to racism continued to pose a serious challenge in Europe with migrant communities and persons belonging to national minorities often facing problems related to the labour market and feeling excluded from society in other ways. Finland emphasized the importance of the participation of minorities in all decision making that concerned them in order to combat their exclusion from society and to safeguard minority rights, thereby reducing tensions and the potential for racism.
Abel Mutatues Juan, Foreign Minister of Spain, said the spread of armed conflicts, whether domestic or international, undoubtedly gave rise to many violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Spain believed that there was ground for hope in the evolution of the domestic political processes now under way in some countries, which held out promise in the field of respect for human rights. He also affirmed his country's opposition to capital punishment.
Danish Foreign Minister Niels Helveg Petersen drew attention to the issue of torture and stressed that the international community needed to make further efforts to prevent and eradicate this evil practice, which still claimed thousands and thousands of victims all over the world. He said that an issue related to the elimination of torture was the abolition of the death penalty. Everyone had the right to life - an absolute right which should not be forfeited under any circumstances.
Paskal Milo, Foreign Minister of Albania, said normalization of ethnic relations in Kosovo remained a primary condition for building an open and democratic society. He said the episodes of ethnic violence in recent months represented a step backward and cast doubt over the future of Kosovo. Albania condemned any attempt made by extremist forces, from whatever side, to provoke a new conflict and a new bloodshed.
Chris Patten, member of the European Commission, underlined that terrorism was a human rights abuse and that the European Union condemned it in all its forms; fighting terrorism however could not be an excuse for tolerating the abuse of the human rights of a wider population; and in any situation, whether fighting terrorism or confronting other human rights abuses, it was always better to search for a political solution, he said.
Taking the floor during the morning debate were Government delegations from Japan, Portugal, China, El Salvador, the United States, Pakistan, Chile, Colombia and Mexico. Several speakers affirmed that the right to development was an inalienable right which could not be seen separately from the respect for and promotion of human rights.
The Commission reconvenes at 3 p.m., to continue its debate on the right to development. The Chairperson of the Commission announced that extended meetings until 9 p.m. will be held during the next three days, and tentatively including Friday.
The right to development
Under this agenda item, the Commission has before it a report of the Secretary-General on the right to development (E/CN.4/2000/19) which contains a summary of replies received from the Governments of Croatia, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, New Zealand and Qatar on the realization of that right.
The Commission is also considering a report (E/CN.4/2000/20) by the High Commissioner submitted in accordance with the Commission on Human Rights resolution 1999/79 on the right to development. The report contains accounts of the activities of the Office of the High Commissioner for human rights relating to the implementation of the right to development as contained in her mandate.
The Commission also has before it a note from the Secretariat (E/CN.4/2000/21) which states that the Independent Expert, Arjun Sengupta, had presented his report (E/CN.4/1999/WG18/2) to the open-ended working group of the Commission on the right to development which met in Geneva from 13 to 14 September 1999. The working group had decided to suspend its work until such a time as a consensus candidate could conduct its deliberations.
Statements
ARJUN SENGUPTA, Independent Expert on the right to development, said he had submitted a report to the working group which had not been discussed last year. The right to development had been defined as an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human being and all peoples were entitled to participate in ,contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural, civil and political development so that all human rights and fundamental freedoms could be fully realized. The right to development was also that human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples were entitled to participate in, contribute to and enjoy the particular process of development. National action in fulfilling the right to development had to be complemented by international cooperation. The question was no longer formulating the right to development but accepting responsibility for its implementation and proposing programmes of actions aimed at freeing the world of huger, mal-nutrition and illiteracy.
ERKKI TUOMIOJA, Foreign Minister of Finland, stated that all value systems had through the course of history manifested a firm belief in the inherent dignity of human life. Ethical and religious traditions had developed the shared conviction that humans were endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of fraternity. The United Nations, in the aftermath of two catastrophic world wars, had built on that when it undertook to codify universal legal norms corresponding to the universal rights that derived from that dignity of the human person. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was a codification of the existing fundamental values of all peoples.
Mr. Tuomioja stressed that the continuing unequal status of women was a fundamental distortion of human rights. Even if human rights were the same for all, women and girls still did not see their rights become reality in that same way as men and boys did. De jure discrimination still occurred when various restrictions on women's human rights were imposed through legislation by States that should instead protect the rights of all their citizens. In addition, the imposition and use of the death penalty was a serious human rights problem with many dimensions. Finland was convinced that since the death penalty could never be applied in a way compatible with human dignity it should be opposed in all its forms until its complete abolition.
The problems related to racism continued to pose a serious challenge in Europe, Mr. Tuomioja continued to state. Migrant communities and persons belonging to national minorities often faced problems related to the labour market and felt excluded from society in other ways. Finland emphasized the importance of the participation of minorities in all decision making that concerned them. One could combat exclusion from society by safeguarding minority rights and thereby reduce tension and the potential for racism, as did Finland with regard to the Sami people. Finland recognized that the flow of refugees were often the product of violations of human rights directed at minorities. Issues related to refugees and asylum-seekers should thus be viewed in the context of respecting and promoting human rights as well as preventing discrimination.
ABEL MATUTES JUAN, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain, recalled that the features of the international scenario in recent years had been the progressive expansion of democracy but, unfortunately, there were still many examples of places where the law was not an emanation of the people's will, but rather an imposition to assure the survival of a specific political regime. All too frequently that had been, and continued to be, the prime cause of the lack of respect for human rights. In addition, the spread of armed conflicts, whether domestic or international, undoubtedly gave rise to many violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Spain believed that there were grounds for hope in the evolution of the domestic political processes now under way in some countries, which held out promise in the field of respect for human rights.
Mr. Matutes Juan affirmed that his country was openly opposed to capital punishment, and as a result both the Constitution and Parliament had proceeded toward its total abolition -- for any type of offence and under any kind of circumstance. The Spanish Government had not vacillated, together with the other members of the European Union, in supporting the efforts to achieve the universal abolition of capital punishment and, meanwhile, the application of a moratorium on its enforcement. Mr. Mutates Juan said that globalization offered many opportunities that should be taken advantage of by all countries. At the same time, it was true that globalization had also exacerbated some harmful elements that should be combatted, such as racism, xenophobia and intolerance. Spain was, and would always be, on its guard against those reprehensible phenomena, and was fully prepared to collaborate with the international community in their eradication. He reiterated his country's resolute support for the holding of the World Conference against Racism, due to take place in South Africa next year.
NIELS HELVEG PETEREN, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark, said the adoption of two optional protocols to the International Convention on the Rights of the Child by the Working Groups of the Commission represented an advancement in the protection of the rights of the child. He hoped that the Commission would pass them for speedy adoption by the General Assembly. The establishment of a permanent forum within the UN for indigenous people would also be a significant contribution to the realization of the objective of the International Decade of the World's Indigenous People.
On the issue of torture, the international community needed to make further efforts to prevent and eradicate the evil practice of torture, which still claimed thousands and thousands of victims all over the world. The Danish Minister said an issue related to the elimination of torture was the abolition of the death penalty. Everyone had the right to life - an absolute right which should not be forfeited under any circumstances. With regard to conflicts, it was imperative to enhance the capacity for conflict prevention and bridge the gap between early warning and response. The international community should rely on the Security Council to authorize humanitarian intervention, however.
The situation in Kosovo, Sierra Leone and Chechnya was a matter of concern and had to be acted upon, Mr. Peteren said. No country had the right to hide violations of human rights behind the principle of State sovereignty. Unfortunately, there were rogue States engaging in or tolerating massive and systematic violations of human rights. These States were beyond the reach of the voice of reason and dialogue. Development assistance was a major contribution to the realization, in particular, of economic, social and cultural rights. Denmark's development assistance amounted annually to $ 1.8 billion, representing one percent of the country's GNP, well above the UN target of 0.7 percent.
PASKAL MILO, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Albania, said that ten months after the end of the Balkan conflict, Kosovo had made progress vis-à-vis the implementation of Security Council resolution 1244. Serious efforts had been made to normalize the situation, rebuild the economic life, prepare the infrastructure for future elections and minimize the efforts of mutual ethnic hatred between Albanians and Serbs. Today, there were fewer crimes in Kosovo than at the beginning of the current year. However, the situation in Kosovo was still far from normal. About 200,000 Albanians were homeless. There was extreme poverty, especially in rural areas, and no economic assistance had been distributed to the population of those areas, despite earlier promises.
Mr. Milo said the current situation clearly showed that the right to development was still endangered in a society traumatized by decades of ethnic genocide and ethnic-cleansing, deeply shaken from last year's crisis and marred by ethnic conflicts which continued to undermine the process of normalization and stabilization of Kosovo. That would be achieved if no time was lost in solving outstanding problems connected with the release of all Kosovar political prisoners in Serbia and with tracking down the considerable numbers of those who had disappeared during the conflict. Mr. Milo said normalization of ethnic relations remained a primary condition for building an open and democratic society. The episodes of ethnic violence in recent months represented a step backward and cast a doubt over the future of Kosovo. Albania condemned any attempt made by extremist forces, from whatever side, to provoke a new conflict and new bloodshed. Albania's position about Kosovo was in full harmony with the position of the international community.
CHRIS PATTEN, member of the European Commission, said there were historical, legal and moral reasons why the European Union was active in promoting human rights. A history of systematic, organized and unparalleled abuses of human rights in the first half of the last century helped directly to bring Western Europe together to form what had eventually become the EU. Sadly, elsewhere in Europe, recent years had seen a repeat of many of those abuses. The EU experience, however, was far from perfect. The recent past, as well as the present, saw a worrying rise in racism, xenophobia and intolerance within the borders of the EU. And in some countries, within political establishments. The EU's recognition of the need to deal with racism within its borders was evidence it believed that the requirement that human rights should be respected was universally applicable and valid.
Mr. Patten said that debating human rights in the abstract could never be an excuse for inaction on the ground. Dialogue could not substitute for deeds. And signing covenants - welcome though it might be - was not the same as ratifying and applying them. Governments had the primary responsibility of carrying through their commitment to human rights.
Terrorism was a human rights abuse and the EU condemned it in all its forms. Fighting terrorism however could not be an excuse for tolerating the abuse of the human rights of a wider population. In any situation, whether fighting terrorism or confronting other human rights abuses, it was always better to search for a political solution. If this was not achievable, the use of force might be the only way forward. Humanitarian law must always be observed during a conflict, however intense.
SHIGEKI SUMI (Japan) said the right to development was reaffirmed by the Vienna Declaration on Human Rights as an universal and inalienable right, integrating economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights. Five point were brought up which could bridge the arguments of divergent schools of thought, accommodating both industrialized and developing countries. First, there was a common understanding that the subject of the right to development was the human person. Secondly, the right to development was not a right by which developing countries could claim assistance from developed countries, nor did it give developing countries the right to have their foreign debts reduced or forgiven by developed countries. Thirdly, there should be no confusion between the right to development and a right to development assistance, however Japan recognized the importance of greater cooperation between developed and developing countries in the realization of the right to development. Fourthly, to realize the right to development one had to act realistically and prioritize. The rule of law and good governance were high priorities. Finally, cooperation was required not only within the field of human rights, but also with organizations within other fields such as the World Bank. It was necessary to appeal to these organizations for their assistance and participation in the discussions and activities of human rights fora. Japan was looking forward to a substantive and meaningful discussion based on a consensus approach at the coming session of the working group. It was regretful that the resolution on the right to development in the General Assembly had been put to a vote for the past three years, this was the confrontational approach taken during the discussion of the resolution at the Third Committee of the General Assembly last year. This was counter-productive and a step backward from the efforts at the fifty-third General Assembly where a consensus had been close.
ALVARO MENDONCA E MOURA (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union and States associated with the Union, affirmed that the Union attached great importance to the right to development and to assessing the question of development from the perspective of human rights. The Union would highly welcome a consensus as a basis for further and more positive evolution in the implementation of the right to development. The right to development, like any other human right, was universal and inalienable. The human being was the cental subject of development and the State had the primary responsibility to eliminate the obstacles to development. The State had the duty to promote and respect the principles of full participation, non-discrimination and equitable distribution of the fruits of development. Particular emphasis was needed as regards vulnerable groups in society such as women, children, minorities and indigenous people. The international community should support and supplement those efforts though effective cooperation. The right to development shared the characteristics of all human rights. The European Union welcomed the recent developments in the strategies of international development, trade and financial institutions, as well as of government development agencies, aiming at adjusting them to the comprehensive concept of the right to development, and to rights-based approach to development.
QIAO ZONGHUAI (China), said that the right to development was both a collective and an individual right, and that it was an integral part of human rights and basic freedoms. Governments should establish their effective development strategies and priorities in light of their national conditions. Different countries were at different stages of development due to their different levels of economic development. Even countries with the same level of development, might adopt different paths and models of development due to their different political systems or cultural and religious traditions. It was simply impossible for any country to copy the existing model of other countries or regions for development.
It was essential to give priority to removing the obstacles to the realization of the right to development. With weak economic foundations, many developing countries were vulnerable to the unfavourable changes in the external economic environment. Many of them suffered from poverty and population pressure, debt burden, deteriorating terms of trade, insufficient infrastructure and environmental degradation. Under such circumstances, developed countries should demonstrate political will and help the developing countries overcome their difficulties and realize development.
The UN human rights institutions should endeavour to make their contributions to achieving the right to development. The Commission on Human Rights had made many efforts in this regard over the past years. Sadly, such efforts had not been able to yield significant results as yet.
MARIO CASTRA GRANDE (El Salvador) welcomed the report of the Independent Expert, particularly as it reflected the terrible effects of Hurricane Mitch on many countries in Central America and the need to relieve public debt in this region. The delegation of El Salvador expressed concern that the working group had not yet started its substantive work. The new chairmanship of Ambassador Salah Dembri of Algeria was welcomed and El Salvador hoped his leadership would give the impetus needed to the working group.
The right to development was essential, a universal and inalienable right on equal level as any other human right. The delegation of El Salvador reaffirmed support for the resolution on development and welcomed its incorporation in the International Bill of Human Rights in the hope it would be strengthened. The right to development included the full development of the potential of each human being. Governments and the international community needed to cooperate to make the right to development a reality. A culture of peace had to be established and observance of all human rights encouraged to achieve harmony and democracy. Extreme poverty and violence were seen as the greatest threats to the right to development, therefore more work was needed on sustainable development.
GEORGE MOOSE, the United States, said his country believed firmly that development was the key to creating a world that was stable, secure and prosperous. The United States welcomed the High Commissioner of Human Rights's implicit challenge to give the right to development substance and practical meaning. Certain basic truths were increasingly evident. There was full agreement on the fundamental principle set forth in the Vienna Declaration affirming that the human person was the central subject of development. This focus on the individual was essential to any successful strategy for promoting development. Viewed in this context, it was clear that human development could not be measured in strictly economic terms. Accordingly, a proper definition of the right to development was most likely to be found in the synthesis of all human rights, as set out in the Universal Declaration.
It was the primary responsibility of Governments to act for the realization of the right to development. To argue that human rights had to be postponed until a country could develop ran counter to the tide of history. The United States had a long and proud tradition of supporting the development aspirations of people all around the world. For many years, the United States had been the largest contributor to international development assistance. This year, President Clinton put forth a new strategy to deepen the relief provided to the world's most heavily indebted poor countries. This programme promised to save developing countries tens of billions of dollars in debt repayment, thereby enabling them to substantially increase investments in health, education, infrastructure and the environment. With its low tariffs and open doors, the United States market was also an important one for many developing countries, with the country purchasing about one-fifth of all the imports in the world.
Finding the path to national development and prosperity was never easy. However, there was nodoubt that genuine and lasting development was fostered by the expansion of individual human rights. Over time, Governments that promoted human rights and sound economic policies were almost certain to find a more prosperous and more peaceful future.
MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan) commented on the organizational aspects concerning the right to development. The effectiveness of the realization of this right depended on key impediments to this aim, such as the inadequate functioning of the international economic system. The trend suggesting that the current economic system could lead to limitless possibilities to prosper and that opening markets would lead to rapid attainment of development goals was a fallacy. There was no evidence to sustain such sweeping generalizations. In fact, most countries had managed to develop despite advice from organizations such as the World Trade Organization. The recent economic crisis proved that years of effort could be wiped out in weeks. Therefore to assert that development could be achieved without changing the world economy was pure fantasy or a cruel joke. The regression in the Third World showed that problems were mostly external and not internal as the greatest impact of the recent global economic crisis was suffered by those countries most integrated in this inadequate economic system.
Pakistan disagreed with the trend which focused the right to development on access to food, basic health care and basic education as it would not lead to development on its own. This was the wrong approach as it would put the onus on developing countries and it would shift attention away from the implementation of international commitments. A more global focus was recommended, which would include: the adequate financing for development, the right to equitable global trade rules, the right to fair access of knowledge and technology, the right not to be subjected to discrimiatory treatment in the gloabl economy, and effective participation in international decision-making processes. It was recommeded that the Commission improve its preparation for the discussion on the right to development, that independent experts adhere to the mandates given to them and that the institutional capacity of the Office of the High Commissioner be enhanced.
PEDRO OYARCE (Chile) reaffirmed the idea his country had put forward a year ago at the Commission and re-emphasized the need to preserve the Vienna Declaration's political consensus. Human rights were indivisible and inter-related, all having equal weight in importance. It was the duty of States to contribute to the promotion of the right to development. The right to development involved a national component and affected the national and international economic systems. It was recommended that work be done to make the right to development a legal concept. The right to development through the North-South logic had to be avoided.
Globalization had generated positive effects, however the benefits of globalization had not always reached all citizens. The recent United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) Assembly in Bangkok had highlighted the insecurities and anxieties with regard to globalization. An evaluation was recommended, adjusting policies and enabling globalization to reach all. A few other recommendations were made: that there be a more integrated approach as seen in inter-agency dialogue, that the UNCTAD idea of the conversion of debt was evaluated. Resources from foreign debt conversions could be spent on children as shown in the UNCTAD Brazilian national project. Promoting development with a human face and identifying an integrated approach, involving governments from all countries, was a priority.
HAROLD SANDOVAL BERNAL (Colombia) said economic, social and cultural rights were as important as political and civil rights. Different human rights were not to be approached as mutually exclusive. Colombia noted the United Nations Development Programme's Human Development Report which stated that the gaps between rich and poor countries were widening and that there was long-term unemployment, illiteracy, and lack of basic education and health care. Globalization had a severe impact on nations, often increasing the difference between the centre and the periphery even further.
Globalization had become an irreversible phenomena, corrective measures had to be taken in order to address the resulting inequalities. Free trade and the free flow of capital had been encouraged, but protectionism and free circulation of the labour force also had to be taken into consideration. If the current poverty was not addressed, peace, security and democracy would be threatened. The right to development also included access to scientific and technological advances. The right to education for children was emphasized, as they were the makers of tomorrow, insuring future good governance and transparency. Civil society activity, the improvement in living standards, and access to education were pivotal as was the view to expand material and technological progress. There was to be no loser or winner in the right to development.
TOMAS DIAZ (Mexico) said the right to development was a global issue which affected all sectors and national and international actors. Often, however, efforts undertaken by States to promote development had been cancelled by the imbalances prevailing in the international financial system. It was essential for obstacles to development to be removed, including the gap between the urgent social and economic needs of developing countries and the international agenda. Developing countries should participate more in the international economic decision-making process so as to help bridge the gap between the domestic and global agenda. In this context, the strengthening of an open-multilateral trade mechanism within the World Trade Organization had be encouraged. Mexico also advocated the setting up of a mechanism designed to increase early response mechanisms to prevent the onset and propagation of international financial crises.
Globalization entailed great risks but also offered new opportunities to promote development and sustainable growth and eradicate extreme poverty. It was important to incorporate the broader notion of the right to development into the international financial institutions. The dialogue established between the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and different international institutions, including the Bretton Woods institutions, was particularly important in that regard. Only with a consistent commitment at the national and international levels could the right to development effectively be fulfilled.
*****
56th session
27 March 2000
Morning
Hears Statements by Foreign Ministers of Finland, Spain, Denmark, Albania
And Member of European Commission
The Commission on Human Rights this morning started its debate on the right to development by hearing its Independent Expert on the subject, Arjun Sengupta, say that the right to development had been defined as an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human being and all peoples were entitled to enjoy economic, social, cultural, civil and political development so that all human rights and fundamental freedoms could be fully realized.
The Commission was also addressed by the Foreign Ministers of Finland, Spain, Denmark, Albania and by a member of the European Commission.
Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja stated that problems related to racism continued to pose a serious challenge in Europe with migrant communities and persons belonging to national minorities often facing problems related to the labour market and feeling excluded from society in other ways. Finland emphasized the importance of the participation of minorities in all decision making that concerned them in order to combat their exclusion from society and to safeguard minority rights, thereby reducing tensions and the potential for racism.
Abel Mutatues Juan, Foreign Minister of Spain, said the spread of armed conflicts, whether domestic or international, undoubtedly gave rise to many violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Spain believed that there was ground for hope in the evolution of the domestic political processes now under way in some countries, which held out promise in the field of respect for human rights. He also affirmed his country's opposition to capital punishment.
Danish Foreign Minister Niels Helveg Petersen drew attention to the issue of torture and stressed that the international community needed to make further efforts to prevent and eradicate this evil practice, which still claimed thousands and thousands of victims all over the world. He said that an issue related to the elimination of torture was the abolition of the death penalty. Everyone had the right to life - an absolute right which should not be forfeited under any circumstances.
Paskal Milo, Foreign Minister of Albania, said normalization of ethnic relations in Kosovo remained a primary condition for building an open and democratic society. He said the episodes of ethnic violence in recent months represented a step backward and cast doubt over the future of Kosovo. Albania condemned any attempt made by extremist forces, from whatever side, to provoke a new conflict and a new bloodshed.
Chris Patten, member of the European Commission, underlined that terrorism was a human rights abuse and that the European Union condemned it in all its forms; fighting terrorism however could not be an excuse for tolerating the abuse of the human rights of a wider population; and in any situation, whether fighting terrorism or confronting other human rights abuses, it was always better to search for a political solution, he said.
Taking the floor during the morning debate were Government delegations from Japan, Portugal, China, El Salvador, the United States, Pakistan, Chile, Colombia and Mexico. Several speakers affirmed that the right to development was an inalienable right which could not be seen separately from the respect for and promotion of human rights.
The Commission reconvenes at 3 p.m., to continue its debate on the right to development. The Chairperson of the Commission announced that extended meetings until 9 p.m. will be held during the next three days, and tentatively including Friday.
The right to development
Under this agenda item, the Commission has before it a report of the Secretary-General on the right to development (E/CN.4/2000/19) which contains a summary of replies received from the Governments of Croatia, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, New Zealand and Qatar on the realization of that right.
The Commission is also considering a report (E/CN.4/2000/20) by the High Commissioner submitted in accordance with the Commission on Human Rights resolution 1999/79 on the right to development. The report contains accounts of the activities of the Office of the High Commissioner for human rights relating to the implementation of the right to development as contained in her mandate.
The Commission also has before it a note from the Secretariat (E/CN.4/2000/21) which states that the Independent Expert, Arjun Sengupta, had presented his report (E/CN.4/1999/WG18/2) to the open-ended working group of the Commission on the right to development which met in Geneva from 13 to 14 September 1999. The working group had decided to suspend its work until such a time as a consensus candidate could conduct its deliberations.
Statements
ARJUN SENGUPTA, Independent Expert on the right to development, said he had submitted a report to the working group which had not been discussed last year. The right to development had been defined as an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human being and all peoples were entitled to participate in ,contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural, civil and political development so that all human rights and fundamental freedoms could be fully realized. The right to development was also that human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples were entitled to participate in, contribute to and enjoy the particular process of development. National action in fulfilling the right to development had to be complemented by international cooperation. The question was no longer formulating the right to development but accepting responsibility for its implementation and proposing programmes of actions aimed at freeing the world of huger, mal-nutrition and illiteracy.
ERKKI TUOMIOJA, Foreign Minister of Finland, stated that all value systems had through the course of history manifested a firm belief in the inherent dignity of human life. Ethical and religious traditions had developed the shared conviction that humans were endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of fraternity. The United Nations, in the aftermath of two catastrophic world wars, had built on that when it undertook to codify universal legal norms corresponding to the universal rights that derived from that dignity of the human person. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was a codification of the existing fundamental values of all peoples.
Mr. Tuomioja stressed that the continuing unequal status of women was a fundamental distortion of human rights. Even if human rights were the same for all, women and girls still did not see their rights become reality in that same way as men and boys did. De jure discrimination still occurred when various restrictions on women's human rights were imposed through legislation by States that should instead protect the rights of all their citizens. In addition, the imposition and use of the death penalty was a serious human rights problem with many dimensions. Finland was convinced that since the death penalty could never be applied in a way compatible with human dignity it should be opposed in all its forms until its complete abolition.
The problems related to racism continued to pose a serious challenge in Europe, Mr. Tuomioja continued to state. Migrant communities and persons belonging to national minorities often faced problems related to the labour market and felt excluded from society in other ways. Finland emphasized the importance of the participation of minorities in all decision making that concerned them. One could combat exclusion from society by safeguarding minority rights and thereby reduce tension and the potential for racism, as did Finland with regard to the Sami people. Finland recognized that the flow of refugees were often the product of violations of human rights directed at minorities. Issues related to refugees and asylum-seekers should thus be viewed in the context of respecting and promoting human rights as well as preventing discrimination.
ABEL MATUTES JUAN, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain, recalled that the features of the international scenario in recent years had been the progressive expansion of democracy but, unfortunately, there were still many examples of places where the law was not an emanation of the people's will, but rather an imposition to assure the survival of a specific political regime. All too frequently that had been, and continued to be, the prime cause of the lack of respect for human rights. In addition, the spread of armed conflicts, whether domestic or international, undoubtedly gave rise to many violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Spain believed that there were grounds for hope in the evolution of the domestic political processes now under way in some countries, which held out promise in the field of respect for human rights.
Mr. Matutes Juan affirmed that his country was openly opposed to capital punishment, and as a result both the Constitution and Parliament had proceeded toward its total abolition -- for any type of offence and under any kind of circumstance. The Spanish Government had not vacillated, together with the other members of the European Union, in supporting the efforts to achieve the universal abolition of capital punishment and, meanwhile, the application of a moratorium on its enforcement. Mr. Mutates Juan said that globalization offered many opportunities that should be taken advantage of by all countries. At the same time, it was true that globalization had also exacerbated some harmful elements that should be combatted, such as racism, xenophobia and intolerance. Spain was, and would always be, on its guard against those reprehensible phenomena, and was fully prepared to collaborate with the international community in their eradication. He reiterated his country's resolute support for the holding of the World Conference against Racism, due to take place in South Africa next year.
NIELS HELVEG PETEREN, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark, said the adoption of two optional protocols to the International Convention on the Rights of the Child by the Working Groups of the Commission represented an advancement in the protection of the rights of the child. He hoped that the Commission would pass them for speedy adoption by the General Assembly. The establishment of a permanent forum within the UN for indigenous people would also be a significant contribution to the realization of the objective of the International Decade of the World's Indigenous People.
On the issue of torture, the international community needed to make further efforts to prevent and eradicate the evil practice of torture, which still claimed thousands and thousands of victims all over the world. The Danish Minister said an issue related to the elimination of torture was the abolition of the death penalty. Everyone had the right to life - an absolute right which should not be forfeited under any circumstances. With regard to conflicts, it was imperative to enhance the capacity for conflict prevention and bridge the gap between early warning and response. The international community should rely on the Security Council to authorize humanitarian intervention, however.
The situation in Kosovo, Sierra Leone and Chechnya was a matter of concern and had to be acted upon, Mr. Peteren said. No country had the right to hide violations of human rights behind the principle of State sovereignty. Unfortunately, there were rogue States engaging in or tolerating massive and systematic violations of human rights. These States were beyond the reach of the voice of reason and dialogue. Development assistance was a major contribution to the realization, in particular, of economic, social and cultural rights. Denmark's development assistance amounted annually to $ 1.8 billion, representing one percent of the country's GNP, well above the UN target of 0.7 percent.
PASKAL MILO, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Albania, said that ten months after the end of the Balkan conflict, Kosovo had made progress vis-à-vis the implementation of Security Council resolution 1244. Serious efforts had been made to normalize the situation, rebuild the economic life, prepare the infrastructure for future elections and minimize the efforts of mutual ethnic hatred between Albanians and Serbs. Today, there were fewer crimes in Kosovo than at the beginning of the current year. However, the situation in Kosovo was still far from normal. About 200,000 Albanians were homeless. There was extreme poverty, especially in rural areas, and no economic assistance had been distributed to the population of those areas, despite earlier promises.
Mr. Milo said the current situation clearly showed that the right to development was still endangered in a society traumatized by decades of ethnic genocide and ethnic-cleansing, deeply shaken from last year's crisis and marred by ethnic conflicts which continued to undermine the process of normalization and stabilization of Kosovo. That would be achieved if no time was lost in solving outstanding problems connected with the release of all Kosovar political prisoners in Serbia and with tracking down the considerable numbers of those who had disappeared during the conflict. Mr. Milo said normalization of ethnic relations remained a primary condition for building an open and democratic society. The episodes of ethnic violence in recent months represented a step backward and cast a doubt over the future of Kosovo. Albania condemned any attempt made by extremist forces, from whatever side, to provoke a new conflict and new bloodshed. Albania's position about Kosovo was in full harmony with the position of the international community.
CHRIS PATTEN, member of the European Commission, said there were historical, legal and moral reasons why the European Union was active in promoting human rights. A history of systematic, organized and unparalleled abuses of human rights in the first half of the last century helped directly to bring Western Europe together to form what had eventually become the EU. Sadly, elsewhere in Europe, recent years had seen a repeat of many of those abuses. The EU experience, however, was far from perfect. The recent past, as well as the present, saw a worrying rise in racism, xenophobia and intolerance within the borders of the EU. And in some countries, within political establishments. The EU's recognition of the need to deal with racism within its borders was evidence it believed that the requirement that human rights should be respected was universally applicable and valid.
Mr. Patten said that debating human rights in the abstract could never be an excuse for inaction on the ground. Dialogue could not substitute for deeds. And signing covenants - welcome though it might be - was not the same as ratifying and applying them. Governments had the primary responsibility of carrying through their commitment to human rights.
Terrorism was a human rights abuse and the EU condemned it in all its forms. Fighting terrorism however could not be an excuse for tolerating the abuse of the human rights of a wider population. In any situation, whether fighting terrorism or confronting other human rights abuses, it was always better to search for a political solution. If this was not achievable, the use of force might be the only way forward. Humanitarian law must always be observed during a conflict, however intense.
SHIGEKI SUMI (Japan) said the right to development was reaffirmed by the Vienna Declaration on Human Rights as an universal and inalienable right, integrating economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights. Five point were brought up which could bridge the arguments of divergent schools of thought, accommodating both industrialized and developing countries. First, there was a common understanding that the subject of the right to development was the human person. Secondly, the right to development was not a right by which developing countries could claim assistance from developed countries, nor did it give developing countries the right to have their foreign debts reduced or forgiven by developed countries. Thirdly, there should be no confusion between the right to development and a right to development assistance, however Japan recognized the importance of greater cooperation between developed and developing countries in the realization of the right to development. Fourthly, to realize the right to development one had to act realistically and prioritize. The rule of law and good governance were high priorities. Finally, cooperation was required not only within the field of human rights, but also with organizations within other fields such as the World Bank. It was necessary to appeal to these organizations for their assistance and participation in the discussions and activities of human rights fora. Japan was looking forward to a substantive and meaningful discussion based on a consensus approach at the coming session of the working group. It was regretful that the resolution on the right to development in the General Assembly had been put to a vote for the past three years, this was the confrontational approach taken during the discussion of the resolution at the Third Committee of the General Assembly last year. This was counter-productive and a step backward from the efforts at the fifty-third General Assembly where a consensus had been close.
ALVARO MENDONCA E MOURA (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union and States associated with the Union, affirmed that the Union attached great importance to the right to development and to assessing the question of development from the perspective of human rights. The Union would highly welcome a consensus as a basis for further and more positive evolution in the implementation of the right to development. The right to development, like any other human right, was universal and inalienable. The human being was the cental subject of development and the State had the primary responsibility to eliminate the obstacles to development. The State had the duty to promote and respect the principles of full participation, non-discrimination and equitable distribution of the fruits of development. Particular emphasis was needed as regards vulnerable groups in society such as women, children, minorities and indigenous people. The international community should support and supplement those efforts though effective cooperation. The right to development shared the characteristics of all human rights. The European Union welcomed the recent developments in the strategies of international development, trade and financial institutions, as well as of government development agencies, aiming at adjusting them to the comprehensive concept of the right to development, and to rights-based approach to development.
QIAO ZONGHUAI (China), said that the right to development was both a collective and an individual right, and that it was an integral part of human rights and basic freedoms. Governments should establish their effective development strategies and priorities in light of their national conditions. Different countries were at different stages of development due to their different levels of economic development. Even countries with the same level of development, might adopt different paths and models of development due to their different political systems or cultural and religious traditions. It was simply impossible for any country to copy the existing model of other countries or regions for development.
It was essential to give priority to removing the obstacles to the realization of the right to development. With weak economic foundations, many developing countries were vulnerable to the unfavourable changes in the external economic environment. Many of them suffered from poverty and population pressure, debt burden, deteriorating terms of trade, insufficient infrastructure and environmental degradation. Under such circumstances, developed countries should demonstrate political will and help the developing countries overcome their difficulties and realize development.
The UN human rights institutions should endeavour to make their contributions to achieving the right to development. The Commission on Human Rights had made many efforts in this regard over the past years. Sadly, such efforts had not been able to yield significant results as yet.
MARIO CASTRA GRANDE (El Salvador) welcomed the report of the Independent Expert, particularly as it reflected the terrible effects of Hurricane Mitch on many countries in Central America and the need to relieve public debt in this region. The delegation of El Salvador expressed concern that the working group had not yet started its substantive work. The new chairmanship of Ambassador Salah Dembri of Algeria was welcomed and El Salvador hoped his leadership would give the impetus needed to the working group.
The right to development was essential, a universal and inalienable right on equal level as any other human right. The delegation of El Salvador reaffirmed support for the resolution on development and welcomed its incorporation in the International Bill of Human Rights in the hope it would be strengthened. The right to development included the full development of the potential of each human being. Governments and the international community needed to cooperate to make the right to development a reality. A culture of peace had to be established and observance of all human rights encouraged to achieve harmony and democracy. Extreme poverty and violence were seen as the greatest threats to the right to development, therefore more work was needed on sustainable development.
GEORGE MOOSE, the United States, said his country believed firmly that development was the key to creating a world that was stable, secure and prosperous. The United States welcomed the High Commissioner of Human Rights's implicit challenge to give the right to development substance and practical meaning. Certain basic truths were increasingly evident. There was full agreement on the fundamental principle set forth in the Vienna Declaration affirming that the human person was the central subject of development. This focus on the individual was essential to any successful strategy for promoting development. Viewed in this context, it was clear that human development could not be measured in strictly economic terms. Accordingly, a proper definition of the right to development was most likely to be found in the synthesis of all human rights, as set out in the Universal Declaration.
It was the primary responsibility of Governments to act for the realization of the right to development. To argue that human rights had to be postponed until a country could develop ran counter to the tide of history. The United States had a long and proud tradition of supporting the development aspirations of people all around the world. For many years, the United States had been the largest contributor to international development assistance. This year, President Clinton put forth a new strategy to deepen the relief provided to the world's most heavily indebted poor countries. This programme promised to save developing countries tens of billions of dollars in debt repayment, thereby enabling them to substantially increase investments in health, education, infrastructure and the environment. With its low tariffs and open doors, the United States market was also an important one for many developing countries, with the country purchasing about one-fifth of all the imports in the world.
Finding the path to national development and prosperity was never easy. However, there was nodoubt that genuine and lasting development was fostered by the expansion of individual human rights. Over time, Governments that promoted human rights and sound economic policies were almost certain to find a more prosperous and more peaceful future.
MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan) commented on the organizational aspects concerning the right to development. The effectiveness of the realization of this right depended on key impediments to this aim, such as the inadequate functioning of the international economic system. The trend suggesting that the current economic system could lead to limitless possibilities to prosper and that opening markets would lead to rapid attainment of development goals was a fallacy. There was no evidence to sustain such sweeping generalizations. In fact, most countries had managed to develop despite advice from organizations such as the World Trade Organization. The recent economic crisis proved that years of effort could be wiped out in weeks. Therefore to assert that development could be achieved without changing the world economy was pure fantasy or a cruel joke. The regression in the Third World showed that problems were mostly external and not internal as the greatest impact of the recent global economic crisis was suffered by those countries most integrated in this inadequate economic system.
Pakistan disagreed with the trend which focused the right to development on access to food, basic health care and basic education as it would not lead to development on its own. This was the wrong approach as it would put the onus on developing countries and it would shift attention away from the implementation of international commitments. A more global focus was recommended, which would include: the adequate financing for development, the right to equitable global trade rules, the right to fair access of knowledge and technology, the right not to be subjected to discrimiatory treatment in the gloabl economy, and effective participation in international decision-making processes. It was recommeded that the Commission improve its preparation for the discussion on the right to development, that independent experts adhere to the mandates given to them and that the institutional capacity of the Office of the High Commissioner be enhanced.
PEDRO OYARCE (Chile) reaffirmed the idea his country had put forward a year ago at the Commission and re-emphasized the need to preserve the Vienna Declaration's political consensus. Human rights were indivisible and inter-related, all having equal weight in importance. It was the duty of States to contribute to the promotion of the right to development. The right to development involved a national component and affected the national and international economic systems. It was recommended that work be done to make the right to development a legal concept. The right to development through the North-South logic had to be avoided.
Globalization had generated positive effects, however the benefits of globalization had not always reached all citizens. The recent United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) Assembly in Bangkok had highlighted the insecurities and anxieties with regard to globalization. An evaluation was recommended, adjusting policies and enabling globalization to reach all. A few other recommendations were made: that there be a more integrated approach as seen in inter-agency dialogue, that the UNCTAD idea of the conversion of debt was evaluated. Resources from foreign debt conversions could be spent on children as shown in the UNCTAD Brazilian national project. Promoting development with a human face and identifying an integrated approach, involving governments from all countries, was a priority.
HAROLD SANDOVAL BERNAL (Colombia) said economic, social and cultural rights were as important as political and civil rights. Different human rights were not to be approached as mutually exclusive. Colombia noted the United Nations Development Programme's Human Development Report which stated that the gaps between rich and poor countries were widening and that there was long-term unemployment, illiteracy, and lack of basic education and health care. Globalization had a severe impact on nations, often increasing the difference between the centre and the periphery even further.
Globalization had become an irreversible phenomena, corrective measures had to be taken in order to address the resulting inequalities. Free trade and the free flow of capital had been encouraged, but protectionism and free circulation of the labour force also had to be taken into consideration. If the current poverty was not addressed, peace, security and democracy would be threatened. The right to development also included access to scientific and technological advances. The right to education for children was emphasized, as they were the makers of tomorrow, insuring future good governance and transparency. Civil society activity, the improvement in living standards, and access to education were pivotal as was the view to expand material and technological progress. There was to be no loser or winner in the right to development.
TOMAS DIAZ (Mexico) said the right to development was a global issue which affected all sectors and national and international actors. Often, however, efforts undertaken by States to promote development had been cancelled by the imbalances prevailing in the international financial system. It was essential for obstacles to development to be removed, including the gap between the urgent social and economic needs of developing countries and the international agenda. Developing countries should participate more in the international economic decision-making process so as to help bridge the gap between the domestic and global agenda. In this context, the strengthening of an open-multilateral trade mechanism within the World Trade Organization had be encouraged. Mexico also advocated the setting up of a mechanism designed to increase early response mechanisms to prevent the onset and propagation of international financial crises.
Globalization entailed great risks but also offered new opportunities to promote development and sustainable growth and eradicate extreme poverty. It was important to incorporate the broader notion of the right to development into the international financial institutions. The dialogue established between the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and different international institutions, including the Bretton Woods institutions, was particularly important in that regard. Only with a consistent commitment at the national and international levels could the right to development effectively be fulfilled.
*****