Default title

MORNING
HR/CT/99/43
27 October 1999


HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE DISCUSSES DRAFT GENERAL COMMENT ON NON-DEROGABLE RIGHTS IN TIME OF PUBLIC EMERGENCY


The Human Rights Committee this morning started to discuss its draft general comment on non-derogable rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in time of public emergency.

A 15-paragraph document underlined that article 4 of the Covenant was of paramount importance for the system of protection for human rights under the Covenant. It allowed for State parties to unilaterally derogate from a part of its obligations under the Covenant, while it subjected both the measure of derogation as well as its material consequences to a specific regime of safeguards.

The Committee had expressed its opinion in the past on various issues related to article 4 of the Covenant, in particular the requirement of international notification of any derogation from the Covenant provisions, and of the nature and extent of derogation in relation to each right. On that occasion, the Committee referred to the fact that no derogation was allowed, even in times of public emergency threatening the life of the nation, from certain rights.

Article 4 stipulated, among other things, that in time of a public emergency which threatened the life of the nation, the States parties to the Covenant might take measures derogating from their obligations under the Covenant to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures were not inconsistent with their other obligations under international law and did not involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin.

Moreover, article 4 says that any State party to the Covenant availing itself of the right of derogation should immediately inform the other States parties, through the intermediary of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, of the provisions from which it had derogated and the reasons by which it was actuated; and a further communication should be made, through the same intermediary, on the date on which it would terminate such derogation.

Also this morning, the Committee Chairperson Cecilia Medina Quiroga announced that Peru had made its intention to come before the Committee during the second semester of the year 2000 instead of next March as scheduled by the Committee. After a brief discussion on the issue, the Committee decided to take up the report of Afghanistan in March in replacement of Peru's report. The reports of Trinidad and Tobago, Uzbekistan, Peru, Gabon, Argentina and Denmark will be considered in October 2000.

During the discussion on the situation of Peru, an Expert said that the human rights situation in Peru had been degraded and that the President of the country was seeking a third term election, which was unconstitutional. The country’s Constitution did not allow a third term election for the same President, however, the actual President managed to get the authorization from the country’s supreme court. In addition, Peru was in conflict with the Inter-American Human Rights Commission on its human rights performance, another expert said.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m., it will take up the report of Cameroon (document CCPR/C/102/Add.2).