GOVERNMENT MINISTERS OF SPAIN, TURKEY, SLOVENIA, SWEDEN AND CROATIA ADDRESS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

Commission on Human Rights
58th session
19 March 2002
Morning





Debate Begins on Organization of Work


Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Spain, Slovenia, and Sweden, the Minister of State of Turkey in charge of human rights, and the Deputy Prime Minister of Croatia spoke this morning before the Commission on Human Rights -- the first of many high-level dignitaries scheduled to address the Commission during its six-week session.

The substantive efforts of the Commission's fifty-eighth session also got under way as national delegations discussed the agenda item on organization of work of the Commission.

Josep Pique i Camps, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain, speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and associated countries, said among other things that violations of human rights could not be considered internal affairs protected by borders or national sovereignty. The creation of special tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, the increasingly established legal accountability of ex-dictators, and the pending creation of an International Criminal Court, which the EU hoped would occur soon, were important steps for advancing human rights.

Nejat Arseven, Minister of State of Turkey in charge of human rights, said among other things that nothing could justify terrorism, a problem that was not unique to any religion, nationality or geography; and that a strategy for battling terrorism required the participation of all States and international organizations, without any double standards. Mr. Arseven also described a reform process undertaken by the Turkish Government to promote human rights.

Dimitrij Rupel, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Slovenia, said his country supported the need to fight terrorism with all available means, but said such a fight should not be conducted at the expense of existing human rights and fundamental freedoms; the erosion of these standards would paradoxically make the terrorists triumph. The international community should also address terrorism's deeper roots, Mr. Rupel said, such as the marginalization of large parts of the world's population into poverty, illiteracy and disease.

Anna Lindh, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Sweden, said among other things that the globalization of economies and markets needed to be matched by a globalization of values based on international standards of human rights. In theory, human rights had advanced through international instruments and treaties, she said, but it was still necessary to act when international law and human rights were violated, such as in the Middle East, in the maltreatment of children or women, in the implementation of the death penalty or the commission of torture, or through destructive acts such as terrorism.

And Zeljka Antunovic, Deputy Prime Minister of Croatia, spoke to the Conference about national efforts to recover from the Balkans conflict of the 1990s. She described the return of refugees and the search for missing persons, but said economic difficulties continued to discourage returnees, and civilians continued to be victims of anti-personnel landmines. She said it was important to bring the perpetrators of war crimes to justice, and Croatia hence welcomed the appearance of Slobodan Milosevic before the International Criminal Tribunal.

Also speaking during the morning session were representatives of Pakistan (on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference), Japan (on behalf of the Asian Group), Cuba, Indonesia (on behalf of the Like-Minded Group), and China.

Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan spoke in exercise of their right of reply.

The Commission will reconvene at 3 p.m. to hear further addresses from Government dignitaries and to continue is debate on the organization of its work.


Organization of Work of the Session

Before the Commission under this agenda item is a report (E/CN.4/2002/15) containing statistics relating to the fifty-seventh session of the Commission on Human Rights.

There also is a report (E/CN.4/2002/16) containing information on the main rules and practices followed by the Commission in the organization of its work and the conduct of business.


Statements

JOSEP PIQUE I CAMPS, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain, speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and associated countries, said the EU was well aware that human rights were interrelated and indivisible and that it was not enough to demand universal compliance with civil and political rights but that there was also a need to promote the advancement of economic, social and cultural rights. It also had to be said that the EU had no intention of imposing its own rules of behaviour on other countries. But it should be remembered that such human rights were binding for all States which had decided freely to be part of the conventional instruments containing those rights. The EU had made great efforts to institutionalize these rights and to put them into practice.

Terrorism concerned all countries in the world, Mr. Pique i Camps said; it was neither new nor restricted to a particular country. The attacks of last September had awakened the international community to the need to put an end to terrorism through a firm and concerted effort of all its members. At the same time, such an effort had to be waged within a framework where fundamental rights and freedoms and the rule of law were fully respected.

The continued interrelation of countries of the world meant it was not possible to remain passive in the face of human-rights violations wherever they occurred, Mr. Pique said. Authoritarian regimes were beginning to call into question their policies of discrimination, repression and cruelty in fighting those who stood for the freedom and dignity of their peoples; and the creation of special tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia and the legal accountability of ex-dictators were important steps in favour of the advancement of human rights, as human rights could not be considered internal affairs protected by borders or national sovereignty. The pending creation of an International Criminal Court, which the EU hoped would occur soon, would be a decisive step in this direction.

More had to be done to help less-favoured sectors of the world, and vulnerable populations, Foreign Minister Pique i Camps said, including women, children, and the aged. The EU continued to be firmly committed to the abolition of the death penalty and the eradication of torture, and the EU supported the text of the draft Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture that was now before the Commission.

NEJAT ARSEVEN, Minister of State in charge of Human Rights of Turkey, said the 11 September attacks had shown that terrorism was one of the most important problems which threatened the whole international community. As a country that had suffered heavily from terrorism, Turkey had repeatedly stated that nothing could justify terrorism and that it was not unique to any religion, nationality or geography. He called for a full-fledged strategy against this menace; a strategy that required the participation of all States and international organizations, without any double standards.

Mr. Arseven said that the protection and the promotion of human rights were primarily the responsibility of States. However, it was a fact that today human rights were not merely a domestic concern of States, they had assumed international dimensions that transcended national boundaries. Turkey had therefore launched in recent years a very comprehensive reform process aimed at the promotion and protection of human rights. A series of legal reforms had been made with a view to strengthening democracy, promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, consolidating the rule of law and independence of the judiciary and fulfilling the obligations stemming from international agreements and conventions.

Amendments adopted by the Turkish Parliament had strengthened the exercise of freedom of thought and conscience, the prevention of torture and inhumane treatment, the strengthening of civilian authority, the freedom and the security of the individual, the freedom of association, the right to a fair trial, inviolability of domicile, the freedom of communications and gender equality. Mr. Arseven said a new Civil Code had also come into force and included provisions which further developed gender equality, the right to association and the rights of the child. The atmosphere of peace after Turkey's successful struggle against terrorism meant that reforms and structural and administrative improvements in the field of human rights were being accelerated.

DIMITRIJ RUPEL, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Slovenia, said that there was no justification for terrorism. It directly negated human rights, the inviolability of human life and the human dignity of the victims and of mankind. Slovenia, a member of the anti-terrorist coalition, supported the need to fight terrorism with all available means. It was important however to reemphasize that the fight against terrorism should not be conducted at the expense of existing human rights and fundamental freedoms. Existing standards represented norms, values and achievements developed over the past 50 years in particular and represented the finest reflection of the growth of our shared civilization. The erosion of these standards would paradoxically make the terrorists triumph. In fighting terrorism the international community should also address its deeper roots, such as socio-economic deprivation and the marginalization of large parts of the world's population into poverty, illiteracy and disease.

Mr. Rupel said the situation in the Middle East was a cause of serious concern to all. Slovenia welcomed the recent Security Council resolution 1397 and a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, lived side by side within secure and recognized borders. The stability and prosperity of South-Eastern Europe was of particular interest for Slovenia. Slovenia had been also continuously intensifying its contribution towards stabilization efforts in South-Eastern Europe. Slovenia assisted demining efforts in States affected by armed conflicts in the Balkans and its work helped to create conditions for the return of refugees by clearing mine-polluted areas.

Slovenia hoped that work on the new protocol to establish an international mechanism to prevent torture would be concluded in the near future and supported the elaboration of an international document on involuntary disappearances. The useful role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in reminding governments about deficiencies in the area of human rights protection should also be highlighted. It was now a well-established practice of the Slovenian Foreign Ministry to meet Slovenian NGO representatives prior to the Commission's session every year. Such a dialogue was invaluable in the common endeavour to strive towards a society where every citizen was truly entitled to and was granted equal rights protection.

ANNA LINDH, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Sweden, said the globalization of economies and markets needed to be matched by a globalization of values based on international standards of human rights. In theory, human rights had advanced through accession to and ratification of international instruments and treaties, but it was still necessary to act when international law and human rights were violated. In the Middle East, for example, action was needed as the conflict grew worse and worse. The extended occupation of Palestinian territory and violations of international law by Israel, such as the settlement policy, were at the core of the crisis, and Israel's extra-judicial killings and use of excessive force against civilians was making the situation more dire. Sweden was equally concerned with Palestinian suicide bombings and terrorist acts against Israel. The conflict could only be solved politically, based on international law and UN resolutions.

More needed to be done to help the vulnerable of the world, Ms. Lindh said, including girls, who often were denied the right to education and were subjected to such offenses as female genital mutilation; the upcoming UN General Assembly Special Session on children would give world leaders an opportunity to discuss problems facing children. Trafficking in human beings, a growing problem, had to be faced; girls and young women had to be protected against domestic violence, including the utterly inexcusable practice of "honour killings"; and women had to be empowered so that they could serve their own best interests -- a step that was crucial to the revitalization of Afghanistan. The death penalty had no place in civilized society, and along with countries such as China, Saudi Arabia, the United States, Iran and Iraq, which stood out in this barbaric practice, many other countries still employed capital punishment. Torture also had to be eradicated everywhere.

Action was needed to protect freedom of opinion, expression, and assembly in such countries as Belarus, China, Turkey, and Zimbabwe -- where recent elections had been a mockery of democracy, Ms. Lindh said. As for terrorism, one of the worst threats to human rights, it had to be fought in concert and with determination, but also in a way that did not set human rights and the rule of law aside. The battle against terrorism also could not be used as an excuse to fight political opposition, separatist movements, or religious minorities. There should be no trade-off between effective action against terrorism and the protection of human rights.

ZELJKA ANTUNOVIC, Deputy Prime Minister of Croatia, said her country had participated in many international, regional and national initiatives for the protection and promotion of human rights. Croatia had at the same time devoted its energy to tackle remaining post-war recovery issues, such as the return of refugees and people missing as a result of war. Unfortunately, economic difficulties continued to discourage the return of refugees and the rehabilitation of war-affected areas. There was also a need for enhanced international action in humanitarian demining since civilians continued to be victims of anti-personnel landmines. International financial aid to this end would be highly useful. Another conflict-related issue which directly reflected on the relations between States in her region was bringing the perpetrators of war crimes to justice. Croatia welcomed the extradition of Slobodan Milosevic to the International Criminal Tribunal and hoped that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia would continue with this policy in the case of the "Vukovar Three" and all other indicted war criminals.

Ms. Antunovic said despite disagreements on the adoption of the final documents of the Durban Conference, the Conference had traced the way for further efforts in combatting racism. The Conference had also indicated that past efforts in uprooting racism had not been enough, and that stronger joint activity was needed in order to uproot racism and other forms of discrimination. The most important activity in implementing the Durban agenda must be led at the national level, through national legislation and elaboration of national plans and bodies for combatting racism. Education in human rights, with emphasis on uprooting various forms of discrimination and informing young generations on problems in this field, was the best way to raise awareness concerning that issue and to prepare children and youth for new challenges in the future.

In Croatia, one could still witness the consequences of the war and its tragic influence on many children. Thus, the Government endorsed the importance of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and welcomed the forthcoming New York Special Session on children in May 2000. Ms. Antunovic was happy to see that the two optional protocols on children were in force and she was pleased to announce that her Government had decided to ratify both protocols. Trafficking of women and children was another issue of great importance and the Croatian Government was taking steps towards development of a national strategy for combatting this kind of human rights violation. Croatia lay on one of the routes for trafficking in persons, with potential threat to also become a destination country. Bearing this in mind, the Government was working on the establishment of a National Committee to combat trafficking in persons.

MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Conference, said that the situation of human rights of Muslim minorities and communities anywhere in the world was an important item on the agenda of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The OIC had adopted several important resolutions at its ministerial and summit meetings which condemned the violations of the human rights of Muslims in occupied Palestine and other Arab territories, Jammu and Kashmir, Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as the Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan and the inhuman isolation imposed on the Turkish Cypriot people. The Islamic world was unanimous in condemnation of the terrorist attacks against the United States and considered terrorism as a grave violation of human rights. It was unfortunate that certain forces had exploited the aftermath of 11 September to justify intensification of the repression of Muslims in Palestine, Kashmir and elsewhere. They had added insult to injury by denigrating Islam and its tenets and values, and had sought to insidiously associate it with terrorism.

Mr. Akram said the OIC believed that the campaign to eradicate terrorism was unlikely to succeed without addressing the root causes of terrorism, such as foreign occupation, poverty, underdevelopment, the inequalities in the international economic order, and inequality within and across societies and double standards that created unfairness. The OIC deplored the practice of adoption, year after year, of resolutions critical of several Islamic countries and believed that these resolutions were politically motivated and did not help in promoting the human rights objectives of the international community.

The Commission must assume its responsibility towards alleviating the plight of the Palestinian people and other occupied peoples, Mr. Akram said. The Islamic countries deeply resented the failure of Israel to comply with the resolutions of the Commission and other UN bodies. The unabated violations of the rights of the Palestinians and other Arabs under Israeli domination must effectively be addressed during the session of the Commission. A heavy responsibility rested on the Commission to halt the massive killings of innocents that were taking place today in occupied Palestine. The OIC also desired a just and peaceful solution to the Jammu and Kashmir dispute in accordance with international legality. It called for commencement of a dialogue between India and Pakistan for this purpose and for the reduction of the dangerous tensions between them.

YASUAKI NOGAWA (Japan), speaking on behalf of the Asian Group, said that as always item 3 on the organization of work was the most opportune agenda item for tackling day-to-day obstacles that barred the way to a harmonious working environment conducive to consensus building. Despite its insistence, the Asian Group was still not satisfied with last year's time management. It believed that there needed to be more efficiency and that the Commission's duration was reduced to four weeks. This year he hoped to see the Commission strive for its most efficient and effective utilization of time and resources to date through such means as testing effective time management methods, limiting additional meetings and night sessions; avoiding parallel informal meetings; ensuring the punctuality of meetings and facilitating and rationalizing non-governmental participation in conformity with relevant ECOSOC resolutions.

Mr. Nogawa said the Asian Group urged that considerations of understanding, dialogue and consultation should govern the work of the Commission, including under Agenda item 9 on the question of the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in any part of the world. A wider measure of consultations and dialogue would ensure a greater degree of compliance and cooperation from Member States, thereby generating a climate of international cooperation for the promotion and protection of human rights. Despite the Asian Group raising the issue of non-governmental organizations accreditation procedures, there had been instances where procedures had not been fully complied with and sometimes had even been exploited or misused to advance interests outside the scope of human rights. Such practices blighted the atmosphere of the Commission and undermined the valuable contributions of responsible non-governmental organizations.

JOSE ANTONIO FERNANDEZ (Cuba) said that the fifty-seventh session of the Commission could not find a solution to the main question that had been ballasting its work: the need to put an end to the harmful practice of using this forum to carry out actions aimed at political domination and the neutralization of voices that still dared to disagree with one power's hegemonic interests. The state of chaos and politicization had reached such a level, and the destructive and confronting action of one State was so evident, that for the first time in history the international community had decided to put it away from the membership of the Commission. It was known however that the mere absence of such a country among the 53 States of the fifty-eighth session of the Commission would not be enough to create the conditions and make possible the necessary change because many industrialized countries had let themselves get involved in the same strategy and some of them had joined the selective policy of demonizing and stigmatizing the South countries within the work of the Commission.

The fifty-eighth session could be a turning point and it could open the way to true international cooperation on human rights. Nevertheless, Cuba had been receiving, with concern, some signs that might seem to indicate just the opposite. New developing countries were already being incriminated. The corollary of all this situation was the ever increasing significant intention of dictating rules of behaviour for keeping the status quo, for homogenizing our thinking and for fixing conditions in order to move the Commission away more and more from any possibility of debate and respect for differences.

NUGROHO WISNUMURTI (Indonesia), speaking on behalf of the Like-Minded Group (LMG), said the Commission should seriously address current situations which affected the entire international community. Among these were the daily blatant violations of the human rights of Palestinians in the occupied territories and the issue of terrorism in the aftermath of the events of 11 September. It was regrettable to note that despite some improvement, the Commission remained prone to polarization, double standards, and finger-pointing, creating an atmosphere that did not always achieve the best results. The LMG was further concerned that each year a disproportionate number of country-specific resolutions sponsored by certain countries or a certain group of countries was adopted by the Commission targeting the developing countries alone. There was a need for a more constructive approach based on dialogue and trust.

The participation of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the Commission and the circulation of NGO documents should be strictly in conformity with the rules; the Special Debate this year should be ruled by transparent, participatory and democratic procedures; there should be further transparency in the negotiation of resolutions; and the Like-Minded Group was increasingly concerned by the deteriorating situation of Commission documentation.

SHA ZUKANG (China) said the Commission must focus on international cooperation and not political confrontation; more attention should be given to the needs of developing countries and more emphasis should be provided to economic, social and cultural rights and the right to development; there must be strict observance of rules and better efficiency of work; as well as regulation of the participation of non-governmental organizations to enable a better working environment. The biggest problem troubling the Commission was the practice of pursuing political confrontation in the name of human rights, a practice that was growing rampant. Unfortunately some countries and groups of countries, out of their domestic needs, tended to make wanton accusations against other countries, and were keen on tabling country-specific resolutions, targeting mainly developing countries.

The importance of economic, social and cultural rights and the right to development was not duly reflected in the composition of the agenda, allocation of time, and the number of resolutions and mechanisms. Neglecting these rights and the right to development was in essence the denial of developing countries' legitimate demand on the issue of human rights. The Commission must redress this imbalance. Concerning the efficiency of the Commission, parallel and night meetings had been proliferating in the sessions over the last years, and had reached a historical high last year. This made it difficult for delegations, some from small countries, to fully participate in the work of the Commission.


Rights of Reply

A Representative of Turkey, speaking in right of reply, said that Sweden had referred to Turkey in an arbitrary manner, making baseless accusations against it. Turkey was a democratic country governed by elected representatives and not by dictators as implied in the statement of Sweden. It appeared that among the 15 European Union countries only Sweden had the problem of confusing human rights and terrorism.

A Representative of Armenia, exercising his right to reply, said that he regretted that the Commission was already deviating from the current agenda item as observed by the delegate of Pakistan. Agenda item 3 concerned the means of organizing the work of the Commission and nothing else. However, he did support the delegate of Pakistan in stating the need for a clear definition between a legitimate struggle for self-determination and terrorism.

A Representative of Azerbaijan, speaking in right of reply, said it was a well-known fact that Azerbaijan had suffered from Armenian aggression for more than 40 years, and that in recent years Armenia had occupied Azerbaijani territory, causing great suffering for millions of Azerbaijanis. The smug statement of Armenia was intended once again to deflect attention from that country's responsibility for its aggressive acts.

A Representative of Armenia, speaking in right of reply, said that the sole purpose of the Azerbaijan delegation was to discredit Armenia. The statement of Azerbaijan had provided false and defamatory information on Armenia in order to politicize the work of the Commission. The time had come for Azerbaijan to refrain from its traditional propaganda.

A Representative of Azerbaijan, in a second right of reply, said Armenia made it more and more difficult to carry on a fair and reasonable debate in international fora such as this. Armenia had invaded Azerbaijani territory; Armenia should admit this fact.

CORRIGENDUM
In press release HR/CN/02/3 of 19 March, 2002, the rights of reply of the delegation of Azerbaijan, found on pages 7 and 8 of the press release, should read as follows:
A Representative of Azerbaijan, speaking in right of reply, said it was a well-known fact that Azerbaijan had suffered from Armenian aggression for more than 14 years, and that in recent years Armenia had occupied Azerbaijani territory, causing great suffering for millions of Azerbaijanis. The smug statement of Armenia was intended once again to deflect attention from that country's responsibility for its aggressive acts.
A Representative of Azerbaijan, in a second right of reply, said Armenia made it more and more difficult to carry on a fair and reasonable debate in international fora such as this. Armenia had invaded Azerbaijani territory; Armenia should admit this fact. Following logician of the Armenian propagation, the decision of parliament of Armenia accepted in 1989 concerning annexation of a part of territory of Azerbaijan most likely should demonstrate the territorial claims of Armenia on Azerbaijan.


* *** *