DRAFT BASIC PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES ON RIGHT TO REMEDY FOR VICTIMS OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS PRESENTED TO COMMISSION

Commission on Human Rights

1 April 2005

General Debate on Civil and Political Rights Continues


The Commission on Human Rights this afternoon continued with its general debate on civil and political rights, and was presented with a draft of the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law.

Referring to the Commission's private meeting this morning under its confidential 1503 procedure, Chairperson Makarim Wibisono announced that the Commission had decided to discontinue discussion of the human rights situation in Honduras; to keep Kyrgyzstan under review; and to review Uzbekistan by appointing an Independent Expert to the human rights situation to that country.

Alejandro Salinas, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the third consultative meeting on the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, said the draft Basic Principles and Guidelines which he was presenting were the result of 15 years of work and the efforts of many people. The Guidelines did not introduce new norms, but consolidated and clarified current international norms. The most significant chapter of the document was that dealing with redress, and the obligations of the State thereunto.

Argentina recommended that the Commission should adopt the draft Basic Principles and Guidelines this session.


In the general debate on civil and political rights, national delegations enumerated the achievement of their Governments in implementing those rights,
Some delegations attributed human rights violations to conflict situations while others regretted the lack of international cooperation in matters of strengthening national institutions aimed reinforcing the democratic process.

A number of non-governmental organizations deplored violations of civil and political rights in specific countries, particularly the right to freedom of religion and religious intolerance. Other issues raised included torture and detention, disappearances and summary executions, freedom of expression, independence of the judiciary, and conscientious objection to military service .

Representatives of the following countries took the floor: Cuba, Pakistan, Eritrea, Argentina, Zimbabwe, Ireland, Romania (on behalf of the community of States having French language in common), Kuwait, Yemen, Norway, Iraq, Switzerland, Chile, Cyprus, Solomon Islands, Rwanda, Venezuela, Serbia and Montenegro, Uzbekistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Algeria, Jordan, Denmark, Tunisia, Belarus and Thailand. Delegates from the International Federation of the Red Cross and Crescent Societies, the Holy See, African Union, Interparlaiamentary Union, and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) also contributed statements.

The following non-governmental organizations also presented statements: Dominicans for Justice and Peace (speaking on behalf of Franciscans International and Dominican Leadership Conference); International Organization for the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (speaking on behalf of Arab Lawyers Union); Centro de Estudios sobre la Juventud (speaking on behalf of Federation of Cuban Women and National Union of Jurists of Cuba); International PEN (speaking on behalf of International Publishers Association); International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (speaking on behalf of International League for Human Rights); Friends World Committee for Consultation - QUAKERS; Marangopoulos Foundation for Human Rights; General Arab Women Federation (speaking on behalf of several NGOs1); International Association for Religious Freedom (speaking on behalf of several NGOs2); World Peace Council (speaking on behalf of Movimiento Cubano por la Paz y la Soberanía de los Pueblos); Conscience and Peace Tax International; Baha'i International Community; and Amnesty International.

The United Kingdom, Turkey, Zimbabwe and Cyprus exercised their right to reply.

When the Commission reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Monday, 4 April, it will continue its general debate on civil and political rights.

Documents on Civil and Political Rights

Under the agenda item on civil and political rights, there are a number of documents.

There is the report of the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the third consultative meeting on the "Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law", Alejandro Salinas, (E/CN.4/2005/59). Participants in the meeting, the report states, considered a revised draft of the Principles and Guidelines and provided comments of a general and specific nature on the text. The Chairperson considers the document to be mature and that the mandate provided by the Commission had been finalized. The draft Basic Principles and Guidelines, detailed in an annex, deals with obligations to respect, ensure respect for and implement international human rights law and international humanitarian law; the scope of the obligation; gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law that constitute crimes under international law; statutes of limitations; victims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law; treatment of victims; victims' right to remedies; access to justice; reparation for harm suffered; access to relevant information concerning violations and reparation mechanisms; non-discrimination; non-derogation; and rights of others.

There is the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture (E/CN.4/54), which provides information on the recommendations adopted by the Board of Trustees at its 23rd session, which took place in October 2004. It also provides information on the contributions received and the pledges made since the publication of its previous report to the Commission and describes the financial needs of the Fund for 2005 and the fund-raising activities of the Board.

There is also the report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on the evaluation of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture (E/CN.4/2005/55). The report reviews the functioning of the Fund with a view to further enhancing its effectiveness and concludes that the Fund is fulfilling its mandate and having a positive impact on victims of torture. However, clarifications and changes in the Fund's policy are needed to improve its effectiveness, and the Fund's Board of Trustees could be better utilized to set strategic priorities and take a pro-active approach with donors and other United Nations entities. Moreover, the Fund is at present inadequately financed in relation to the needs it meets and to the requests it receives, the report states.

There is the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on enhancing the role of regional, sub-regional and other organizations and arrangements in promoting and consolidating democracy (E/CN.4/2005/127). The report summarizes the information received from United Nations bodies, specialized agencies and regional organizations, and covers action undertaken in the field of electoral assistance and monitoring, research on democracy-related topics, development of knowledge and capacity-building at regional and country level, inclusion of democratic clauses in agreements with countries, adoption of reference texts and documents on democracy, and funding activities to support these activities.

There is the report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the interdependence between democracy and human rights (E/CN.4/2005/57) which lists a compilation of documents or texts adopted and used by various intergovernmental, international, regional and sub-regional organizations aimed at promoting and consolidating democracy.

Presentation by Chairperson of Third Consultative Meeting on Guidelines on the Right to Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Violations of Human Rights

ALEJANDRO SALINAS, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the third consultative meeting on the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, said he would present to the Commission the contents and scope of the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. To have full appreciation of the work involving the preparation of the Guidelines, it was necessary to remember that this had taken 15 years and many people had been involved since 1989. There had been many meetings held, with extensive participation by Government delegations and non-governmental organizations, and the fruit of those consultations was being presented to the Commission.

The text of the Basic Principles and Guidelines had benefited from many years of hard work, with improvement thanks to contributions by Governments and non-Governmental experts. It had been drawn up reflecting the point of view of the victim, but it should be useful for Governments as well. It did not introduce new norms, but consolidated and clarified current international norms. It reflected the minimal standards in international law in this sphere. The decision had been taken to deal jointly with international human rights and international humanitarian law, noting that there was no legal impediment to this for purposes of determining the obligations of the State for redress to victims. The text maintained harmony in its intellectual structure and a conceptual unity, avoiding distinctions between victims and between the nature of the offence.

The most significant chapter was that dealing with redress, and the obligations of the State thereunto. It had been a significant drafting exercise, with widespread support for the various forms of reparation established and the way these were set out. The Basic Principles and Guidelines were based on the concept of human and social solidarity, and not just on State responsibility. They did not seek to resolve natural differences between the two branches of international law. Implementation of the principles and guidelines was not retroactive.

General Debate on Civil and Political Rights

RODOLFO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said that few peoples had been confronted in the manner that the Cuban people had been with another country's desire for domination; few Governments had done as much against freedom and democracy while claiming to support it as had the United States. The United States Government proselytised about its alleged promotion of democratic values, while its real goal was to extend its hegemony and domination, not just over the country's own citizens, but over the whole world. Recalling several moments in United States history, he said that the era of McCarthyism had gone down in history as shameful evidence of the extremes to which the United States regime could descend. However, that shame had also been resurrected by the current conservative administration, whose false messianic role of carrying freedom to the world had been harmful to humanity.

The worst may be yet to come, he cautioned. The scandalous irregularities witnessed in Florida during the 2000 presidential elections had been followed by similar irregularities in the key state of Ohio in 2004. As in 2000, African Americans and the poor had been the main victims. The superpower remained determined to transplant its Mafioso-style political manipulations to this Commission. The present administration had no need of a Commission on Human Rights based on the ideals, which had inspired Eleanor Roosevelt in the wake of Fascism. The United States claimed to be committed to confronting global terrorism, yet it guaranteed impunity to terrorists operating out of Florida against Cuba. Five young Cubans were being held arbitrarily for having tried to counter those terrorist activities. The Cuban people called for the release of these five anti-terrorist fighters, and thanked those who supported that just claim.

MANSOOR KHAN (Pakistan) said over the years, consideration of agenda item 11 on civil and political rights had become more of a formality and a ritual. The credibility of the Commission, questioned since long, had now been challenged. Secretary-General Kofi Annan had called for replacing it with a Human Rights Council. This was a critical moment in the history of this forum, which had much to its credit in setting normative frameworks that accorded primacy to human rights in international politics. It was truly a moment for introspection. There was a perception that the Commission had failed in its duty because its members included countries whose human rights record was far from perfect. But then which country could claim to be a paragon of perfection? In the view of Pakistan, the Commission's apparent failure could be attributed to two trend lines: one, the political considerations driving the Commission's activities. That in reality translated into strong and persistent perceptions of a coalition of the rich and powerful against the weak and the vulnerable. Or was that a generalization? The majority did not think so. Two, the tendency to exempt and exonerate "political favourites" even when they were clearly the worst violators of human rights or peddlers of policies of occupation, whether in Palestine and Kashmir, or the marginalized in any society.

Promotion and protection of all human rights, including civil and political rights, were fundamental to Pakistan's paradigm of governance. Pakistan believed in introspection and corrective action. Over the last few years, Pakistan had made resolute efforts to upgrade and refine its legal and institutional infrastructure to meet its national obligations. A healthy debate on all issues and existing legislation manifested the urge to reform and to renew.

AMARE TEKLE (Eritrea) said the acceptance of the universality of human rights and the persistent effort to develop and expand norms and standards, to set priorities and to reconcile differing conceptions of human rights had been praiseworthy and encouraging. The confluence of interest in the promotion and protection and consolidation of human rights had made human rights a major issue in international relations. Human rights were considered to go beyond being the concern of States, and to transcend the laws of sovereign States. Yet it was also obvious that the cultural and social environment in, and the level of economic development of each member of the international community would be a major obstacle to the development of as many norms and common standards as desirable.

Human rights were about the prevention of victimisation of a human being. Such victimisation had many sources, including inter-state wars and conflicts. The most basic of human rights was national independence. The second basic right was security, broadly defined. It was also incumbent on responsible Governments to ensure subsistence and to eliminate hunger and poverty. This made the right to peace and the right to development pre-eminently relevant and inter-connected. Such freedom and security could not flourish in the absence of the exercise of freedom of thought and religion. In spite of the frustration often expressed, humanity had done quite well in the ennoblement of human rights, the legislation of Covenants and the creation of standards and norms. It was evident that with more time would come more ideas, and with more ideas would come more standards, norms and common values.

SERGIO CERDA (Argentina) said the Government of Argentina welcomed the conclusion of the draft Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. The Commission should approve that document during the present session, without a vote. Concerning the final phase of the drafting of the international instrument against enforced disappearances, the negotiations should conclude by the end of 2005. The result should be an autonomous convention, with a supervisory body. Argentina planned to present a draft resolution on the right to truth later during the Commission, which would help to bring greater visibility to a fundamental aspect of clarifying the fate of victims of human rights violations. The draft resolution represented a contribution to the campaign against impunity, and also contained elements of a humanitarian nature in its attempt to bring reparations to victims and their families. Overall, reform of the United Nations and the Commission should help to strengthen the Organization's basic role in the protection and promotion of human rights. The system must have the best means and instruments to ensure respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

CHITSAKA CHIPAZIWA (Zimbabwe) said the people of Zimbabwe had gone to the polls to elect their deputies. The dictators had prejudged the elections weeks before the people went to the polls. Well-paid non-governmental organizations sang as prescribed by their paymasters and declared that the vote could not be free and fair. The well-oiled frantic media lynch mob of the Anglo-American world chimed in as did some members of the European Union. Civil and political rights were precious to the people of Zimbabwe. The people took up arms to win the right to vote and to be able to enjoy all the rights hereto entailed. What united the detractors of the people were not concerns with the people's civil and political rights.

The realization of civil and political rights on the African continent had a most troubled path. That history taught the peoples many a lesson, perhaps the most enduring one being that freedom was not a gift, one should fight for it and achieve it for all time. Painful though it should be to recall, why should the words of that great son of Africa, Patrice Lumumba be relevant today: "nous ne sommes plus vos singes" (we are no more your monkeys).

Zimbabwe strongly adhered to the tenets of civil and political rights as outlined in the texts it valued. It would work with anyone to realize those better, for its own people first and, for their realization in other parts of the world.

MARY WHELAN (Ireland) said the case of Pat Finucane, along with Rosemary Nelson's, had been addressed by the appropriate special procedure of the Commission. The Government had welcomed the publication of reports on the murders, and the announcement that public inquiries would be set up into the circumstances surrounding the murders, and these inquires had now been established and had begun their initial investigations. The British Government had announced that an inquiry would be established on the basis of new legislation. While welcoming this, there was concern for the provisions of the legislation proposed.

Any inquiry into this case should be public to the degree possible, and any disputes about this should be independently arbitrated by the courts. Any such inquiry should also be independent of the Government. The Inquiries Bill would not allow for the required independence. The family of Pat Finucane and the community at large wanted the issue of collusion publicly and independently examined to establish the facts. However, the family, after battling for almost fifteen years, were now being asked to accept something that failed to fulfil the required criteria. They had made it clear they would not cooperate with an enquiry established under the Inquiries Bill. The Government of Ireland with regret asked again that the appropriate special procedure of the Commission continue to give attention to the case of Mr. Finucane.

DORU COSTEA (Romania), speaking on behalf of French-speaking countries, said that, within the French-speaking world, there had been studies of how to promote democracy and human rights more actively. Ministers and Heads of State and delegations had met in Bamako, Mali, for an international symposium of democratic practices, human rights and freedoms in the French-speaking countries. Among the commitments undertaken there figured the commitment to reinforce democratic institutions, to increase the extent of monitoring by neutral bodies over all publicly-funded bodies and institutions, and to ensure that public documents regulating democracy were based on public consensus. French-speaking countries had also pledged to promote the participation of all political parties in national, regional and local political life, to promote citizens' participation in political life, and to recognize the importance of civil society participation in political life.

Also pledging to promote the spirit of tolerance and a democratic culture in all its aspects, he said the French-speaking countries had agreed to promote the emergence of new partnerships between public and private authorities, and to ratify international and regional human rights instruments, honour the contractual obligations entered into therein and train all responsible for their effective implementation. They had also agreed to support the creation of national human rights structures and to promote work of human rights defenders, to promote cooperation between international and regional organizations, and to promote initiatives aimed at supporting democracy. At the November 2004 meeting of Heads of State and Government in Ouagadougou, those present had also committed themselves to cooperate fully with the Special Rapporteurs and other special procedures of the Commission on Human Rights, and to work with the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights. The French-speaking world continued to support the work of the Commission.


NAJEEB A.A. AL-BADER (Kuwait) stressed the need to combat impunity in all aspects of human rights violations. Kuwait had been invaded in 1990 and massive human rights violations had been committed. The human rights violations committed by the former regime of Iraq against Kuwaiti prisoners was well documented. There had also been a number of mass graves found in Iraq, probably of disappeared Kuwaiti citizens and third country citizens.

Kuwait had emphasized that the crimes committed against the people of Kuwait should not be attributed to only to one person. Those who organized, commanded and executed the atrocities should also be held responsible and brought to justice. They should not be immune for the various human rights violations they committed during the war against Kuwait.

CHIHIRO SATO, of International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, said the International Federation was working energetically to find new ways to do more than eliminate religious intolerance, as it was not enough to seek to eliminate intolerance without parallel programmes to promote tolerance and the value of diversity, and to mutually support community strength. More work was needed at local and community levels if discrimination was to be effectively addressed. This was now central in work being done by the International Federation and other components of the Movement. However, programmes to eliminate discrimination were not enough in themselves.

There was no doubt that there was a need for legislative and other similar measures against discrimination, but there was an even greater value in the promotion of tolerance as a value for all communities, and in the promotion of the value of diversity as an enriching tool for the benefit of prosperous nations. Without full respect between members of communities, there could be no sense of humanity in those communities. Without that humanity there could be no truly effective programmes which built solidarity in the face of disasters. Without that solidarity, built and maintained by the communities themselves, there could be no preparation for the onset of the unexpected. Partnership at the national and local level involving the National Societies of the Federation and National Human Rights Institutions would be a strong asset in the struggle against the evils of religious discrimination.

MANAF HAMOOD AL-SALAHI (Yemen) said Yemen had taken serious steps to develop human rights, and noted that the country's legislation was among the most outstanding with respect to human rights. Last August, the country had presented to the Human Rights Committee its fourth periodic report on its commitment to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which had reviewed and analysed all legislative developments, policies and procedures which had been applied since 2001. The report also covered positive developments in the human rights field, including the parliamentary elections held in April 2003, reform of the judiciary system, review of national laws to bring them into conformity with international instruments, and cooperation with the Working Group on arbitrary detention.

Subscribing to the importance of commitment to democratic choice and broadening the culture of human rights, Yemen had hosted a number of regional and international conferences and forums, he noted, including the International Conference of Emerging Democracies, the International Forum on Democracy, the International Conference of Democracy and Human Rights and the role of the International Criminal Court, among others. The country had also hosted several meetings on inter-civilizational dialogue.

ASTRID HELLE AJAMAY (Norway) said Norway noted with concern responses received by the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions contesting that his mandate covered acts which fell under international humanitarian law. Human rights law and international humanitarian law were complementary. The right not to be arbitrarily deprived of one's life was a non-derogable human rights, but the question of whether a killing conducted in an armed conflict was "arbitrary" depended on the applicable rule of international humanitarian law. Norway regarded the death penalty as wholly inconsistent with the notion of human dignity. All States should abolish that form of punishment.

Norway would once against like to stress the importance of the non-derogable and peremptory character of the prohibition against torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. Democracy and the rule of law were weakened dramatically when that norm was disrespected. Norway was therefore deeply concerned by reports on frequent and increasing violations, in particular when State security was perceived to be under threat.

BAHA ALSHIBIB (Iraq) said Iraq had witnessed, for the last four decades, the most vicious violations of human rights when Iraqis had been deprived of the simplest civil and political rights. The people had managed to forget, by their strong will, the misery and suffering of the past. Many goals had been achieved in the new era during the very short time since the collapse of Saddam the tyrant. Many laws and regulations had been repealed which used to impose so many restrictions on the freedom of expression and the practice of political work.

Iraqis, who were proud of their civilised heritage of more than 5,000 years, were willing to play their part with the international community for the happiness, prosperity and freedom of mankind all over the world, particularly after having tasted the freedom from which they had been deprived of for many generations. The future ambitions of Iraqis included building a democratic, federal and united state of Iraq, and establishing amicable relations based on the respect of sovereignty and independence with other States and nations in different aspects on the basis of human values and mutual interests.

JEAN-DANIEL VIGNY (Switzerland) said the absolute prohibition of torture, cruel and inhuman treatment or punishment constituted one of the cornerstones of international law. Unfortunately, that prohibition was not always respected. Switzerland reaffirmed its importance, and urged all States to reaffirm the absoluteness of the ban. All States must protect individuals from torture; detention in secret and incommunicado detention promoted these practices. States must communicate information about prisoners to their families and legal representatives. Access to detainees must be provided to family members, medical personnel, and representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross. Upon allegations of torture, investigations must be conducted by independent bodies. He also stressed that the refoulement of individuals to countries in which practices of torture continued remained a source of concern. Individuals must not be returned to them.

Similarly, nothing could justify enforced disappearances, he stressed, yet there had been an increase in instances of that phenomenon in the fight against terrorism. The true number of disappeared persons was greater than was known, and all States must shed light on the scourge, to alleviate the suffering of the victims and their families. The country would continue to work on the elaboration of a legally-binding instrument against this phenomenon.

JUAN ANTONIO MARTABIT (Chile) said the Government of Chile had taken measures to pay compensation to victims of torture and arbitrary detention or to those who had suffered other forms of deprivation of freedom between 1973 and 1990. During 2004, the Chilean society had showed its maturity by providing reparations for the human rights violations of the past committed by the former regime; the victims of torture and other cruel treatment had been compensated with the Government spending a high amount of money. The victims included about 35,000 persons who had been arbitrarily detained and tortured. The National Commission on Political Prisoners and Torture had been working to document the various victims. The compensation the State provided was not only material in terms of money but there had also been acts of moral compensation.

JAMES C. DROUSHIOTIS (Cyprus) said regarding missing persons in Cyprus, the European Court of Human Rights in its judgement of 10 May 2001 in the case Cyprus v. Turkey had found Turkey responsible for 14 violations of the European Convention on Human Rights, including three violations of the Convention related to the issue of the missing persons and their relatives. According to the Court, the Government of Turkey should conduct an effective investigation into the whereabouts and fate of Cypriot missing persons who disappeared in life-threatening circumstances or in respect of whom there was an arguable claim that they were in Turkish custody at the time of their disappearance.

To date, however, Turkey continued to refuse to comply with the said judgement in setting up a new effective mechanism for the investigation of the fate of the missing persons and providing all the relevant information on the steps take§n to remedy the violations for which the Court held Turkey responsible. The Government of Cyprus had always been committed to a humanitarian solution to the problem of missing persons to ensure the restoration and respect of the human rights of all the missing persons and their families. This goal was not conditional to the actions or inactions of others. In this respect, a special call was made to the Government of Turkey to exercise the necessary will and action in assisting to the solution of the problem.

SILVANO M. TOMASI (Holy See) said that unswerving commitment to religious freedom, and to the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance, remained an important priority for the Holy See. No man or woman should be forced to act against their convictions, nor restrained from acting in accordance with those convictions, whether in private or in public, alone or in association with others. The reaffirmation of this basic human right, and its universal application, was both timely and necessary. Violations of this right continued, and the situation had deteriorated in some cases with regard to both Christians and other religious groups. The policy of the indivisibility of human rights was weakened by the seeming non-engagement witnessed sometimes when Christian and other religious minorities were threatened, or even persecuted outright.

Respect for religious freedom remained key to peaceful and constructive coexistence, he added. The process of globalization, which had brought about increased pluralism in societies that had long remained isolated, and the growing phenomenon of migration, had brought different religions into closer contact. Without mutual respect and State commitment to impartial and active implementation of the right to religious freedom, the potential for destructive conflicts and loss of freedom in society heightened. Old prejudices and discriminatory laws had been worsened by new challenges such as open hostility, and even the murder of religious persons engaged in the defense of human rights, and meant that heightened vigilance and discernment were called for. The war on terror had renewed religious intolerance toward several communities of Christians. The serious application of existing instruments on the right to religious freedom and their continued monitoring would facilitate the guarantee of religious freedom everywhere. General education and inter-religious dialogue would do much to raise awareness of the critical importance of mutual respect and appreciation.

KHADIJA MASRI, of (African Union), said that the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights had always affirmed the crucial importance of the right to freedom of opinion and expression as an individual human rights, a corner stone of democracy, as well as a means to guarantee respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Article 9 of the African Charter stipulated that all persons had the right to information and the right to express and disseminate their opinion within the context of the law. The effective enjoyment of those rights had invoked vivid controversy concerning their limit. The Commission had witnessed that phenomenon through the numerous communications it had received from individuals under its complaint procedures.

The African Commission had reflected on a thought with regard to the differences encountered by individuals on the use of their freedom of speech and opinion and had drafted a further definition of this right. In 2002, a declaration had been adopted on the freedom of expression in Africa. The declaration had recalled the fundamental character of the right to freedom of expression in the process of democracy.

LAURENCE ROZEC (Interparliamentary Union) said freedom of expression, association and assembly were pillars of democracy, as they were necessary to build political will in its wider sense. These freedoms were also vital in the exercise of parliamentary mandates. Freedom of expression was the main tool of members of parliament which allowed them to express the will of the people. The Interparliamentary Union had always supported this crucial freedom. In the majority of cases examined by the Committee, often Governments were criticised for limited freedom of expression, for example as in Eritrea, Zimbabwe and Myanmar.

Given the importance of the freedom of expression for democracy and Parliaments, the Interparliamentary Union would organise a seminar to study the extent and the limits of this right.

ETHEL FALU SIGIMANU (Solomon Islands) said that women had been largely underrepresented at all levels of decision-making in both the Government and the private sector for too long. Since its independence, the Solomon Islands had had only one female parliamentarian. At present, there were no female representatives in Parliament. The high illiteracy rate among women was exacerbated by a culture that placed women subordinate to men. Women's equal participation in decision-making was not just a demand for social justice or democracy; it was fundamental to achieving a transparent and accountable government. Moreover, during the five years of civil unrest, which had come to an end a year and half ago, women, children and the elderly had been those who suffered most. Cases of torture, rape and forced labour had been among the problems faced. Juveniles had been coerced into joining militias and the freedom of expression had been limited.

The Solomon Islands had not yet signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, she said. Thus, she called upon the Commission on Human Rights to enhance its advocacy mandate to step up the process of ratification of the Covenant. The Solomon Islands were a party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, but lacked the capacity to ensure the instrument's implementation. The Commission should provide the support necessary to assist the Government to increase its national capacity.

VALENTINE RUGWABIZA (Rwanda) said forced disappearances and summary executions had been common in Rwanda in the past. They had been the practices of Governments and had culminated in the genocide of 1994. Many citizens still questioned the fate of their disappeared parents, spouses and friends. At present, the witnesses of the perpetrators of the crime in the Gracaca local courts had spoken about the common graves and how those victims had been killed. The Government of Rwanda thanked the Working Group on involuntarily and forced disappearances for the cooperation it extended. Rwanda would continue to respond to the inquiries of the Working Group and would implement its recommendations.

Rwanda welcomed the idea of drafting a binding legal instrument with the view to protecting the right of persons against forced disappearances. The concerns expressed by the African group in taking into consideration of the acts of non-state actors should be taken into account.

VLADIMIR GONZALEZ VILLAPAREDES (Venezuela) said in 1999, Venezuela had embarked on the construction and strengthening of a democratic, participatory and active society to overcome historic exclusion. This had required education in peace and democracy, and an enhancement of the values of society. Social responsibility in radio and TV were now covered by an Act which ensured the rights of users to be informed and to receive messages which fostered democratic values. The judiciary had been restructured, with the training and selection of appropriate judges. Unlike other democracies, where the executive was involved in the selection of judges, this was done by the legislature.

Some isolated individuals sought to create doubt regarding the independence and autonomy of the judges, but forgot that they were misleading themselves. Five years after the change in Government in Venezuela, there were clear signs that civil and political rights were increasingly playing an active part in the lives of citizens.

MARINA IVANOVIC (Serbia and Montenegro) said the country had presented its initial report to the Human Rights Committee in July 2004 and the Committee had declared that significant progress had been achieved in legislative and institutional reform, following the regime change in October 2000. However, concerns had been raised regarding the issues of impunity, allegations of torture, and independence of the judiciary. Implementation of the Committee's recommendations was underway, and information would be submitted to it by July of the present year. One of the major recommendations had been that the country cooperate fully with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and he reported that such cooperation had been intensified.

As one of the co-sponsors of the draft resolution on human rights and special procedures, Serbia and Montenegro fully supported the work of those mechanisms, and drew attention to the recent visit of the Special Rapporteur on the protection and promotion of the right to freedom of expression and opinion to the country. A visit by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the human rights of displaced persons was expected during the next year. Unfortunately, it was necessary to bring to the Commission's attention once more the situation of the human rights in the province of Kosovo and Metohija. One year after the large-scale, ethnically-motivated violence by Kosovo Albanians, the human rights situation remained very difficult. The United Nations Mission in Kosovo remained responsible for the protection and promotion of human rights in the province. It should, therefore, be recalled that the Human Rights Committee had asked UNMIK to prepare a report on implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in Kosovo.

BADRIDDIN OBIDOV (Uzbekistan) said international cooperation in human rights was a priory of the Government of Uzbekistan's foreign policy. The Government had already submitted its periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, which had considered and concluded that the country was on the right track in respecting the civil and political rights of its people. Uzbekistan had also already published the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in local languages and had widely disseminated the text. Further measures had been taken by the Government to uphold the human rights of its citizens. The Government had also extended its cooperation with non-governmental organizations working in the area of civil and political rights.

SEFIK FADZAN (Bosnia and Herzegovina) said the destiny of missing persons was one of the crucial issues for shaping the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the character of its society. In fact, it would be difficult to implement the ongoing reforms that were important for the country to become integrated in Europe and to build a modern democratic and open society if traumas and the prolonged suffering of relatives of missing persons were not solved. The basic problem in tracing missing persons was a lack of reliable information on the mass and individual graves locations, keeping evidence undisclosed, the lack of harmonised databases for missing, exhumed and identified persons, and lack of political will to have continuous and better organised tracing for missing persons at the different levels of the State.

The process of reconciliation and building of a democratic society in Bosnia and Herzegovina was impossible without solving the destinies of thousands of persons still unaccounted for. This was also a crucial part for the improvement of the whole human rights situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as for further rebuilding of confidence. Families of the missing persons had a right to know the truth of their fate or whereabouts.

LAZHAR SOUALEM (Algeria) said that the democratic transition had changed the political landscape of Algeria and had privileged republican values, respect for fundamental liberties and non-violence. These values had inspired the State to undertake institutional reforms, and had also inspired the population to assist in the management of affairs. National reconciliation intended to turn the page on history and start a new page, one of economic development and promotion of social well being. Among the past issues that must be addressed was that of disappeared persons, to which end an ad hoc commission had been established. After months of work, that commission had submitted its report to the President on 31 March 2005.

Four years of judicial reform had also been envisaged, he said, including for strengthening of the power of the judiciary, limitations on the discretionary detention, systematization of medical exams for those detained, reduction of delays in cases of appeal, criminalization of torture and sexual harassment, strengthening of the legislation on torture, provision of recourse to provisional detention, indemnization of the State in cases of judicial error, decriminalization of infractions linked to economic management, and facilitation of judicial assistance to the poor and indigent. There would also be reform simplification of procedures and strengthening of the execution of decisions.

AZZAM ALAMEDDIN (Jordan) said incidences of physical assault and attacks against Muslim places of worship, cultural centres, businesses and properties had been increasing alarmingly. Often, unjust legal measures were taken against Muslims in non-Muslim countries simply due to their religious beliefs. Jordan urged all States to take corrective measures to allow the freedom of religious belief for Muslims living within their jurisdictions, and to halt all hate crimes and infringements upon the freedom of religious belief. Jordan strongly urged Governments, religious bodies and civil society organizations to continue dialogue at all levels to promote greater tolerance, respect and understanding of Islam and Muslims globally.

In a world that was rapidly evolving, the margin for error was widening and the stakes were higher than ever. One could not afford to go wrong or digress from promoting a culture of peace globally, where dialogue was no longer a fighting word and where the practice of human rights would become a reality on the ground.

HENRIK REE IVERSEN (Denmark) said torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment were among the most nefarious violations of human integrity, and among the most outrageous violations of human dignity. The prohibition of torture was a pre-emptory norm of international law, which was to be respected unequivocally by all States. This was established by international, regional and national case law. There were no exceptions to the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Culture, religion, security or any other reason could not be invoked as justification for inflicting torture. The absolute nature of the prohibition against torture applied in all circumstances, in time of peace and in time of international or internal armed conflict, and in the fight against terrorism.

Certain other human rights could be less absolutely defined. The exercise of such rights could be restricted by law if necessary for the respect of the rights of others, for the protection of national security, of public order or of public health or morals. Certain rights could be derogated from in times of public emergency, but this did not apply to the right not to be tortured or subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The prohibition was absolute and unconditional. Torture was a violation of fundamental human rights, condemned by the international community as an offence to human dignity, branded as a crime against humanity. There was a global consensus against torture. It was high time that this consensus was turned into positive action for the global eradication of torture.
SAMIR LABIDI (Tunisia) said that democracy and the strengthening of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Tunisia reflected an irreversible political choice. The country had adopted a comprehensive approach to all human rights, based on the conviction that one could not develop civil and political rights and strengthen democracy and pluralism, without taking into account the dynamics of economic and social development. The national reform process had placed the individual at its centre. The Constitution had been reformed, with the result that the rule of law and its institutions had been freshly encouraged. Pride of place had been given to human rights, which constituted an important step in activating institutions for the attainment of fundamental human rights of the citizen. There had also been an extensive exchange of views recently on the elections, which had strengthened political democracy. The elections had taken place with respect for the principle of transparency. It was important to continue these efforts in various spheres and the country would do so.

ANZHELA KORNELIOUK (Belarus) said the Government of Belarus had been promoting peace within the context of religion. The increase in the number of religious organizations had prompted the Government to amend its legislation so that citizens could freely enjoy freedom of conscience and religion. The legal provisions laid down to strengthen the Government's relations and cooperation with religious organizations and individuals had allowed a number of organizations to enjoy the right to freedom of religion. The Government, conscious of the need to guarantee the right to freedom of religion, as stipulated in various international treaties and as fixed by European standards, had put in place institutions that monitored the implementation of those rights.

INGEBORG BREINES, of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), said freedom of expression was one of the basic themes at stake. It should not be overshadowed by discussions on technology and infrastructure. It was important that the United Nations as a whole, in close cooperation with Member States and civil society partners, muster their energies to influence the terms of intellectual and ethical debate and to shape the global policy agenda concerning knowledge societies and how they are to be constructed. Some countries, driven by political or security considerations, believed they should limit freedom of information by restricting free access to the Internet. Other countries, while reaffirming their commitment to the respect of freedom of expression, were concerned about potential abuse and lack of control on the Internet.

In some instances, as in the fight against paedophilia and racist or hate propaganda, very often the crime weapon rather than the criminals was condemned. Another very delicate issue was the protection of freedom of expression in the struggle against terrorism. The balance between measures required for fighting terrorism and the respect of fundamental rights, especially the right to information, was sometimes difficult to find. Establishing rules for monitoring mechanisms or information flow was not without risk. Securing a public domain where people could freely exchange ideas and participate in political debate was essential for respecting democratic principles.

CHAIYONG SATJIPANON (Thailand) said the Government of Thailand remained determined to push forward the development of human rights protection mechanisms in the country to ensure that they were brought in line with international standards. Numerous legal measures had been implemented to provide better guarantees of civil and political rights, such as the Witness Protection Act, which aimed to accord the best possible protection for witnesses in judicial proceedings. An amendment had recently been made to the Criminal Procedure Code to include provisions to better protect the rights of the accused, alleged offenders and defendants. The Government had also agreed, in principle, to accede to the International Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment of Punishment. Related agencies were currently

engaged in consultations to identify whether new laws or amendments to existing laws would be required to ensure that Thailand be able to fulfil the spirit of the Convention.

The Government of Thailand also remained committed to ensuring that a culture of human rights took root in Thai society, he said. Human rights had been incorporated into the curricula of primary and secondary education in the country, and further measures would be implemented within the framework of the World Programme for Human Rights Education. An innovative campaign to train justice volunteers had been launched in every community across the country to strengthen empowerment and community justice systems. The Government also remained committed to strengthening its partnerships with other Governments, intergovernmental bodies and civil society in promoting human rights in the country and beyond.

PHILIPPE LEBLANC, of Dominicans for Justice and Peace, speaking on behalf of Franciscans International and Dominican Leadership Conference, said they strongly considered that religious intolerance and discrimination on the basis of religion remained one of the root causes of many conflicts, wars and ongoing violence. In March 2004, the Pakistani Bishops' Commission had called for the abolition of laws that discriminated against religious minorities and the establishment of an independent commission with judiciary powers to accept claims and reports from minority groups. They also noted the 19 years of struggle to repeal laws that grossly violated the rights of deprived sections, especially women and religious minorities, and asked the Government to make 2005 the year of change and to repeal those discriminatory laws.

HANAN SHARFEDDIN, of International Organization for the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, speaking in a joint statement with Arab Lawyers Union, said the anxious and confused world suffered from irrational acts of violence committed by some people who rushed to wars, killings, extermination and used their destructive weapons against the Middle East region, known as the cradle of civilisations and divine prophecies. The International Court of Justice was the only remaining hope for humankind to avoid wars, settle disputes among nations, reach an understanding and achieve unity. It was wondered why the major Western States that called for reforming the international community had not attempted to pay more attention and exert more efforts to grant the International Court of Justice more powers to help achieve peace all over the world. It was the dream of humanity, and one day it would be fulfilled.

NATIVIDAD GUERRERO, of Centro de Estudios sobre la Juventud, speaking on behalf of Federation of Cuban Women and National Union of Jurists of Cuba, speaking in a joint statement, said it might seem repetitious to espouse the human right to opportunities to flourish, or to call for a halt to the aggression in Iraq. It was even more repetitious to repeat the calls to release five individuals held by the United States. Yet, it was necessary to do so because they and their families continued to suffer due to these unjust sentences. It was deplorable to have to call for the release of children and youths, who were being held in violation of their basic human rights. The United States had turned Guantanamo Bay into a concentration camp. It was clear that wealth had been concentrated in a few hands – in the hands of those who were not short of water, food and medicine. Cuba would continue to demand the release of those five youths until justice was done.

ALEXIS KRIKOURIAN, of International PEN, speaking on behalf of International Publishers Association, said they were deeply concerned that the new penal code that came into force in Turkey on 1 April was deeply flawed. They were surprised to see that in one instance at least, the new Penal Code extended the range of writings that could be penalized. Article 305 of the new Code which criminalized "act(s) against the fundamental national interest" was accompanied in its draft form with an explanatory note that the article could be used for such acts as "making propaganda for the withdrawal of Turkish soldiers from Cyprus or the acceptance of a settlement in that issue detrimental to Turkey or contrary to historical truths, that the Armenians suffered a genocide after the First World War".

JOACHIM FRANK, of International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights, speaking on behalf of International League for Human Rights, said it was of the utmost importance to bring the situation in the Chechen Republic, which was undoubtedly the worst human rights and humanitarian crisis in Europe, to the attention of the Commission. In spite of clear violations, Russia continued to resist establishing any meaningful accountability process for crimes committed by its forces. Neither the civilian nor military prosecutors' offices undertook the necessary systematic, credible and exhaustive criminal investigations into all alleged violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. A resolution had been adopted by the Commission in 2001, but the Russian authorities had not complied with it. The Commission should adopt a resolution this year reiterating the concerns expressed in 2001.

ELEONOR ANDREWS, of Friends World Committee for Consultation - QUAKERS, said that the need for post-conflict amnesties for conscientious objectors highlighted in resolution 2004/35 remained a matter of priority. Many conscientious objectors, who had fled their countries because there was no adequate provision for conscientious objection, remained unable to return, or even to visit their countries without facing penalties. Much progress had been made at the international level on the recognition of the right of conscientious objection to military service, and requirements for alternative service. However, many problems remained at the national level. The Commission should address the issues of recognition of the right of conscientious objection to military service where conscription existed, provision of alternative civilian service, granting of asylum for unrecognized conscientious objectors and post-conflict amnesties for them.

SIMOS A. ANGELIDES, of Marangopoulos Foundation for Human Rights, said since Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974, approximately 37 per cent of the territory of Cyprus remained under the continuous occupation and control of Turkey, resulting in collective violations of human rights. Turkey was since responsible for the continuing enforced disappearances of approximately 1,500 persons, 613 civilians, 133 children and 116 women. Those missing persons were apprehended, in areas under the effective control of the Turkish army. The enforced disappearances and consequential violations of human rights were inflicted, strictly on the grounds of race, religion, national origin and association with a national minority, because they were members of the Greek Cypriot community.

JULIETH SAYEGH, of General Arab Women Federation, speaking on behalf of several NGOs1, said despite the ongoing negotiations between Israel and Palestine, the illegal construction of the separation wall, the confiscation of Palestinian land and properties and the demolition of private homes continued. These unjust policies did not only violate international law, but also denied the Palestinian people self-determination. In Iraq, the new so-called democratization era, supposed to offer freedom and democracy, had created chaos and insecurity. The current policy of imposing a model of freedom and democracy by threats and interference in the internal affairs of countries was now applied through the recent issue of a Security Council resolution pressuring both Lebanon and Syria to comply. A country could not be forced into obedience. Attempting to do so brought despair, hate and conflict. The fundamental dignity of people and nations was self-determination, a right that should not be violated.

JOHN TAYLOR, of International Association for Religious Freedom, speaking on behalf of several NGOs2, delivering a joint system, said the agenda item entitled religious intolerance should be more appropriately titled freedom of religion or belief, in accordance with the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief. There were far too many instances of intolerance against religions and beliefs, from outside those traditions, between them, and within them. Such intolerance violated fundamental and non-negotiable freedoms, which must be upheld. Sadly, there were far too many flagrant connections between violations of the freedom of religion or belief, the right to education, rights of the child, and women’s rights. Moreover, there was a continued lack of United Nations instruments to monitor implementation of the legal and social measures that had been recommended by the Commission over many years in its attempt to apply the principles of the 1981 Declaration on the Elimination of all Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. While the freedom of religion or belief was not "protected" by a specific convention, it should benefit from invoking conventions or instruments on other human rights issues.

SHABIR CHOUDHRY, of World Peace Council, speaking on behalf of Movimiento Cubano por la Paz y la Soberania de los Pueblos, said millions of people around the world were still denied their basic human rights, and they suffered from tyrannical and colonial rules. People were still suffering because some United Nations Member States gave little value to human rights, and continued to oppress and intimidate people. It was unfortunate to note that even those States who were members of the Commission violated human rights; and they became members of the Commission not because they wanted to enhance the human rights, but because they had other motives. People of Jammu and Kashmir suffered on both sides of the Line of Control. Even when the peace process was going on, and certain confidence building measure were put on place, innocent people of Jammu and Kashmir continued to suffer and die.

DIRK PANHUIS, of Conscience and Peace Tax International, said the criminal was not only the person who committed the crime, but also the one who financed it. The present system of taxes financed war crimes, and many people felt the need for their taxes to pay for peace and not for war. This was a fundamental right of the individual, flowing through the freedom of opinion and religion also. The people of Colombia were suffering under a number of attacks, some from one side, some from the other. Colombia was paying a high cost in human and economic terms due to wars. Rich countries did not suffer from wars, but paid for them through taxes. Responsibility was not just for those who organised war crimes, but also for those who paid for it. State taxes made all responsible for these crimes for which they had paid through their taxes. The Commission should urgently investigate all restrictions on the right to expression.

DIANE ALA'I, of Baha'i International Community, said that the Government of Egypt had begun to erect a computerized system for the issuance of identity cards last year. This system was based on a policy that made it impossible for officials to issue an ID card without entering a religion for each applicant, and it had been programmed to accept only three entries: Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Bahais, who were Egyptian citizens, used to be able to obtain identity cards that did not specifically state a religion, or even with their religion stated. Now they could not review their identity cards, and risked having them confiscated whenever they needed to identify themselves. Young Bahais coming of age could not obtain ID cards at all. Numerous appeals had been made to the Government of Egypt to lift Presidential Decree No. 263, which had dissolved the Bahai institutions, banned their religious activities, and brought their community life to a halt. Instead of seeing progress, Bahais were now becoming non-citizens within their own country.

PETER SPLINTER, of Amnesty International, said Amnesty International was gravely concerned that the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment was being challenged, especially in the context of the "war on terror". Acts that would have been unacceptable only a few years ago were increasingly tolerated, if not explicitly, then implicitly through the refusal to hold persons and governments responsible for such acts accountable. That situation, which might appear limited to a small number of countries, had by the position of the countries involved the potential to undermine the prohibition of torture and ill treatment more widely. Amnesty International shared the view expressed by the Special Rapporteur on torture that "condoning of torture was per se a violation of the prohibition of torture". Attempts by some governments, notably the United States of America, to legitimise interrogation methods, conditions of detention and other treatment that amounted to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment should be rejected.


Right of Reply

NICK THORNE (United Kingdom), speaking in a right of reply in response to the statement made by Ireland on the issue of the inquiry into the death of Pat Finucane, said the United Kingdom continued to believe that an inquiry held under the aegis of the new Inquiry Bill was the best way forward. The independent Canadian Judge who had overseen the investigation into allegations of collusion in the death of Pat Finucane said that the subsequent Inquiry should be held to the greatest extent possible in public, and this was what would happen. The new Bill did not allow anyone to withhold information from the Chair of the Inquiry. The Inquiry would have to be balanced with national security, and thus a large proportion of the Inquiry would probably have to be held in private.

MUSTAFA LAKADAMYALI (Turkey), speaking in exercise of the right of the reply, said the issue of missing persons remained a humanitarian issue and should not be abused for political purposes as the Greek Cypriot Representative had done. Turkish Cypriot citizens had been the first victims of the phenomenon, with hundreds having been subjected to enforced disappearances. Some 500 still remained unaccounted for. The United Nations had decided to establish a tripartite Committee on Missing Persons to address the issue. Turkey not a party to the issue of missing persons in Cyprus, but had cooperated with the Committee. Instead of cooperating with the Committee and accepting that the majority of missing Greek Cypriots were victims of the 1974 coup, the Greek Cypriot side had chosen to exploit the issue, and had refused to attend the meetings of the committee. Thus, the committee had so far failed in its task. The Committee on Missing Persons had resumed its work this past year, as both sides had reaffirmed their commitment to resolving this humanitarian issue that affected families on both sides.

SAMUEL MHANGO (Zimbabwe), speaking in a right of reply in response to the statement made by the International Parliamentary Union (IPU), said it was perplexed at the statement. Zimbabwe had laws, which it wanted to see observed, and was therefore astonished that the IPU should fight from the corner of the lawbreakers. The IPU preached the religious adherence to the rule of law and order. When Zimbabwe did this, it found fault. Please, could the IPU be objective and practise what it preached. Zimbabwe had a newly-minted Parliament whose members would be announced this weekend. It was hoped that the IPU could join with Zimbabwe in looking to the future and not backwards.

JAMES C. DROUSHIOTIS (Cyprus), exercising his right of reply in response to the right of reply of Turkey, said that Turkey could not deny its obligations regarding the issue of missing persons who disappeared during and after the Turkish invasion in Cyprus. The Turkish Cypriot side in the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus had refused to cooperate constructively in order to achieve substantive progress. Turkey's role was absolutely essential and indispensable to any efforts for a humanitarian solution of this problem, which affected Greek Cypriot, Greek and Turkish Cypriot families. The Government of Cyprus was making every effort regarding the 500 Turkish Cypriots missing, whose cases had been submitted to the Committee on Missing Persons.

MUSTAFA LAKADAMYALI (Turkey), speaking in a second right of reply, said that on the issue of missing persons, the Greek Cypriot side should stop using this purely humanitarian issue as a political tool, and should work constructively so that the sufferings of the families on both sides could come to an end.

JAMES C. DROUSHITIS (Cyprus), speaking in a second right of reply, said that his Government's objective was to determine the fate of each and every missing person in Cyprus. The Government called upon all concerned to join in that humanitarian endeavour. Turkey's cooperation was essential and indispensable to solve this humanitarian problem, which affected all Greek Cypriot, Greek and Turkish Cypriot families.


CORRIGENDUM

In press release HR/CN/05/26 of 30 March, the statement by Marangopoulos Foundation for Human Rights on page 12 should read as follows:

SIMOS A. ANGELIDES, of Marangopoulos Foundation for Human Rights, said Turkey was aspiring to joint the European Union, yet was currently occupying the territory of another European State. Turkey was a member of the United Nations, yet it had not respected the United Nations Charter. Turkey had brought settlers from mainland Turkey to Cyprus, violating amongst others the right to housing, property, family life and education, in an attempt to change the demographic and ethnic character of the island. Moreover, since the Turkish invasion, 15,000 to 20,000 icons, several thousand antiquities, archaeological and other objects had been removed, sold abroad or destroyed. This methodical and institutionalised destruction was part of a premeditated policy to eradicate every trace of history and culture of the people of Cyprus.

* *** *

1Joint statement on behalf of : General Arab Women Federation; Union of Arab Jurists; International Organization for the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination; World Young Women’s Christian Association; All India Women's Conference; World Movement of Mothers and International Educational Development.

2Joint statement on behalf of : International Association for Religious Freedom; Pan Pacific and South East Asia Women's Association International; International Council of Jewish Women; Pax Christi International; International Federation of University Women; International Federation of Social Workers; Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University; Susila Dharma International Association; All India Women's Conference and World Union of Catholic Women's Organizations.

* *** *

For use of the information media; not an official record