HIGH-LEVEL OFFICIALS OF SIX COUNTRIES AND EUROPEAN UNION ADDRESS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

Commission on Human Rights
60th session
19 March 2002
Afternoon




Ministers and Deputy Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Lithuania, Israel, Kazakhstan, Canada, and Afghanistan, the Secretary of State of Finland and the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union addressed the Commission on Human Rights this afternoon, remarking on matters ranging from global efforts to end terrorism and ongoing violence in the Middle East to the establishment of democracy in Afghanistan.

Antanas Valionis, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Lithuania, speaking in his capacity as Chairperson of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, said terrorism, acts of violence in the Middle East, human rights situations in a number of countries, and the challenges of globalization were all adding to human insecurity around the globe. The promotion and protection of human rights must be at the centre of all strategies for countering terrorism, he said.

Michael Melchior, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Israel, told the Commission that never had it been so hard to find a balance between protecting the lives and human rights of innocent Israelis and innocent Palestinians -- never had it been so hard to maintain a vision of dialogue and tolerance between Jews and Arabs. Continuing violence in the region had not been helped by a "politicized" approach by the Commission, he charged.

Kassymzhomart Tokayev, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Kazakhstan, informed the Commission of steps taken by his country in a democratization programme that aimed at full respect of human rights and freedoms and the prevention of any form of discrimination. Democratic processes in Kazakhstan had become irreversible, he said; democracy now was an inalienable part of the lives of the country's citizens.

Antti Satuli, Secretary of State of Finland, said intolerance was inflicted on many minorities around the world, including linguistic minorities and minorities in terms of sexual orientation. If discrimination was to be combatted effectively, no form of discrimination could be excluded, he said.

Xavier Solana, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union, said it was vital for the Commission on Human Rights to remain an uncompromising watchdog of events around the world. Unfortunately, the new century had already seen its share of ethnic abuses, religious and gender discrimination, and denial of democratic rights, and the recurrent threats remained conflict, poverty, and isolation, he said.

William Graham, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Canada, said among other things that the primary response to the attacks of 11 September had been an unprecedented level of international cooperation. At the same time, he shared the concerns of the High Commissioner for Human Rights regarding excessive measures taken in several parts of the world -- the war against terrorism must not be used as a pretext for repression, and it was a common misconception that greater security could only be assured by compromising on respect for human rights.

And Abdullah Abdullah, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan, recounted the activities of the Interim Administration of the country since it had been established under the Bonn accord. In the first few days of the Administration's work, all decrees imposed by the Taliban regime had been abolished, he said. These inhumane decrees had formed the basis of a repressive system that had violated the basic human rights of Afghan men, women and children. Today women had the right to choose to wear a burka or not, Afghan men were not forced to grow beards, and Afghan girls and boys would be going back to school in a few days.

Guatemala also addressed the Commission under its agenda item on the organization of work.

Thailand, Palestine, Lebanon, Zimbabwe, Israel, India, Sudan, Sweden and Belarus spoke in exercise of the right of reply.

The Commission will reconvene at Wednesday 10 a.m. to begin consideration of the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and follow-up to the World Conference on Human Rights.


Statements

ANTANAS VALIONIS, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Lithuania, speaking as Chairman of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, said today's world was a complicated one. Terrorism, acts of violence in the Middle East, human rights situations in a number of countries, and the challenges of globalization all added to human insecurity. Terrorism, and especially the horrific terrorist acts of 11 September, set many challenges to the purposes and principles of the United Nations, international peace and security, human rights, human development and the rule of law. Promotion and protection of human rights should be at the centre of the strategy to counter terrorism.

This session was one of the starting points for follow-up to the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, Mr. Valionis said. Among the most significant parts of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action were strategies developed to combat discrimination and intolerance and they were a powerful tool for fostering social harmony.

The Commission's work on the question of the death penalty was to be commended, Mr. Valionis said. Its resolutions on the subject rightly set priority on the establishment of a moratorium on executions. Thanks to abolition of the death penalty in almost all member States of the Council of Europe, no executions had taken place in that geographical region since 1997. The Council's commitment to abolition of capital punishment had recently led to the adoption of a new Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights that prohibited the death penalty in all circumstances, including for crimes committed in time of war or of imminent threat of war.

MICHAEL MELCHIOR, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Israel, said that in Israel literally every day innocent children, women and men were being shot and blown up, in discotheques, wedding halls, malls, buses, cafes and restaurants. Leaders who undertook to resolve all differences through negotiation and not violence were heard praising the heroism of the terrorists. And, perhaps most chilling of all, parents of suicide bombers were expressing the hope that other children would follow suit.

The World Conference against Racism itself had hosted the most racist speeches and proposals to be heard in an international forum since the Second World War, Mr. Melchior said. At the Durban Conference and in organs and agencies throughout the international community, anti-Semitism had taken on the form of the political demonization of an entire nation; it had become anti-Zionism. The new anti-Semitism could be seen spreading like a plague. Only this week, official Arab newspapers had published the age-old blood libel that Jews used infant blood to make the Passover matza, repeating a lie that across the generations had led to countless pogroms and the loss of innocent life.

The last Israeli Government had made far-reaching peace proposals, Mr. Melchior said. But despite the support of the international community for these proposals, the Palestinian leadership had rejected them, and responded with a wave of brutal violence that had continued and escalated to this day. Never had it been so hard to find the balance between protecting the lives of innocent Israelis threatened by terrorism and violence, and of innocent Palestinians living in those areas from where these acts were emanating; and never had it been so hard to maintain a vision of dialogue and tolerance between Jews and Arabs.

Meanwhile the Commission's Special Rapporteur to the territories had an open-ended mandate that did not even permit him to consider Palestinian terrorism and human rights abuses, Mr. Melchior said. Israeli actions were treated under one agenda item and the rest of the world was addressed under another. There was nothing more damaging to respect for human rights than this failure to recognize that if the human rights agenda was dictated by political considerations and not the needs of the suffering, then one was engaged in politics, not human rights.

KASSYMZHOMART TOKAYEV, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan, told the Commission that 10 years ago the citizens of Kazakhstan had had only a mere awareness of their rights. But Kazakhstan had launched an unprecedented democratization programme for the Central Asian region which aimed at full respect for human rights and freedoms and the prevention of any form of discrimination. Democratic processes in Kazakhstan had become irreversible; democracy was an inalienable part of life of all its citizens.

Mr. Tokayev said the first condition for building a truly civil society was internal stability. In the current historical situation, democracy could not be built on ruins, could not emerge from social chaos. Kazakhstan firmly supported the International Covenants on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and Civil and Political Rights and their optional protocols, and had adopted a principal decision to join these Covenants in the near future. Meanwhile a series of measures had significantly improved the country's economy; over the last two years the economic growth rate was 24 per cent, which had made it possible to more efficiently solve social problems.

Mr. Tokayev said that there was no need to hide the fact that Kazakhstan was sometimes a target of criticism on the part of the international community and non-governmental organizations. The country did not favour the creation of an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust caused by the publication of national reports and documents related to human rights in other States. Consideration of the human rights situation was a very delicate sphere and should be the prerogative and responsibility of the United Nations.

Measures had been taken by Kazakhstan within the framework of the global campaign against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, Mr. Tokayev said. The country was working to establish an independent and efficient judicial system. Also on the agenda were such issues as decentralization of power, introduction of a post of Commissioner on Human Rights, and election legislation. There should be no doubt on the part of the international community that Kazakhstan would strive for a further widening of democratic rights and individual freedoms.

ANTTI SATULI, Secretary of State of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, said Finland attached great importance to the achievements of the World Conference against Racism. For the first time the world community was able to reconcile around a joint moral judgement of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade and other colonial injustices and to close this dark chapter in history. To combat discrimination effectively, it was vital that no form of discrimination should be excluded. Racial intolerance and incitement were today inflicted upon all kinds of minorities, including linguistic minorities; such intolerance also extended to such matters as sexual orientation.

Women and girls in some parts of the world were being killed on the basis of so-called honour, Mr. Satuli said. Such killings could never be acceptable. Traditional practices must never be allowed to lead to violations of human rights. Although killings wrongly justified in the name of honour were caused by private actors, they revealed a systematic failure by States to prevent and investigate these crimes and to punish the perpetrators.

Ratification of the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflicts would be completed in Finland within a matter of weeks, Mr. Satuli said. The Roma were a minority who were discriminated against in every country where they lived and were seldom represented in political offices or public service; the President of Finland had launched an initiative for the creation of a pan-European body to represent the Roma. Finland welcomed the establishment of the Permanent Forum for Indigenous Issues within the United Nations which would convene for the first time in less than two months.

JAVIER SOLANA, High Representative for the European Union's Common Foreign and Security Policy, told the Commission that human rights would remain at the heart of the role of the European Union in the century to come because human rights were at the core of European integration. It was regrettable that this new century had already seen its share of ethnic abuses, religious and gender discrimination, and the denial of democratic rights. This Commission was and had to remain an uncompromising watchdog against abuses of this kind. Human rights were threatened from many directions, but the recurring threats demanded particular attention: conflict, poverty and isolation. These three factors, often inter-related, were both the parents and the offspring of human rights violations.

The European Union was working hard to improve its capacities for crisis management and conflict prevention, Mr. Solana said, and the defence and promotion of human rights were important elements in these efforts. The EU had stated that its actions would be undertaken in accordance with the principles and purposes of the UN Charter. Tackling the root causes of conflict meant defending the legitimate rights of all those involved in conflicts, regardless of their religion or ethnicity, and that was why the European Union placed such emphasis on citizens' rights when facilitating peace in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and in supporting the actions of the international community in Bosnia and in Kosovo.

In the Middle East, the EU wanted more than peace and more than just an end to violence, but democracy, security and freedom, Mr. Solana said. He welcomed, in all respects, Resolution 1397 of the UN Security Council adopted last week, but made one special plea: that the Resolution's call to respect universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law be heeded by all, immediately and unconditionally.

Half of the world's population had to survive on less than three Euros per day, Mr. Solana said. If the Commission was serious about the universality of human rights, then it had to face up to the matter of poverty. Actions taken against those responsible for the barbaric acts of September 11, meanwhile, were not targeted against any people or religion, and must never be. These actions were aimed at the reinforcement of international security and the rule of law as well as at the security of the countries affected by the scourge of terrorism.

WILLIAM GRAHAM, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada, said one could take heart from that fact that that primary response to the attacks of 11 September had been an unprecedented level of international cooperation in fighting terrorism. At the same time, he shared the concerns of the High Commissioner for Human Rights regarding excessive measures taken in several parts of the world. The war against terrorism must not be used as a pretext for repression. It was a common misconception that greater security could only be assured by compromising respect for human rights. The security of the State and the security of the person were mutually reinforcing.

No country was above criticism for its human rights record, including Canada. Clearly challenges remained in a number of areas, including achieving the goal of gender equality and effectively responding to "multiple discrimination". It was in giving a voice to the aspirations of people everywhere for recognition of their human rights, and in articulating measures needed to implement them, that the Commission was most valuable. It was responsible for significant advances on such issues as impunity and freedom of expression, as well as substantial improvements in a number of specific countries. Although it was not possible to agree on every issue, most negotiations at the Commission ended in some form of compromise and constructive action. Unfortunately, such consensus seemed to be growing increasingly difficult to achieve.

At the World Conference against Racism, Canada had hoped to focus on the development of forward-looking strategies to combat racism, Mr. Graham said. Unfortunately, the Conference was inexcusably marred by unacceptable references to the Middle East, as well as by divisions on several other issues. In spite of this, Canada had chosen to stay to articulate its positions on important matters. In his view, Durban was an example of what could happen when multilateral forums lost their focus on their raison d'etre. In spite of such setbacks, Canada remained committed to enhancing the effectiveness of the multilateral human rights system through close cooperation with the High Commissioner and her Office. Mr. Graham announced that Canada would provide funding of $1 million in support of the work of the Office of the High Commissioner in Afghanistan.

ABDULLAH ABDULLAH, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan, said that over the years the regular investigation of human rights conditions in Afghanistan and the findings of the Special Rapporteur had given ample evidence of violations committed against the Afghan people. These violations had assumed disproportionate dimensions under the Taliban rule and had lasted until the regime's recent demise. The events of 11 September had deeply saddened the Afghan nation. Ironically, only 48 hours before that tragic day, Afghanistan had lost Ahmad Shah Massoud, the legendary leader of the Afghan resistance against the terrorist forces operating in the country.

Mr. Abdullah said that he had accounted for the activities of the Interim Administration of Afghanistan since the Bonn accord and today, in Afghanistan, there was a concern for all ethnic groups' human rights, not just those of one ethnic group. The Interim Administration felt a responsibility towards all Afghans, regardless of ethnicity, gender or religious and political preferences. As part of its commitment to internationally recognized human rights standards, in the spirit of the Bonn agreement guidelines, it had held a human rights workshop in Kabul a few days ago. In the first few days of the Administration's work, all decrees imposed by the Taliban regime had been abolished. These inhumane decrees had formed the basis of a repressive system that had violated the basic human rights of Afghan men, women and children. Today Afghan women had the right, once again, to choose to wear a burka or not, Afghan men were not forced to grow beards and Afghan girls and boys would be going back to school in a few days. Efforts would be focused on promoting respect for human rights conventions, treaties and obligations, and would include action to counter the illicit production and trafficking of drugs.
Serious attention also was being focused by the Administration on priority tasks related to education, health, agriculture, roads, power, rural development, refugee resettlement, and cultural revival, Mr. Abdullah said. However, massive aid and technical assistance were needed to deal effectively with urgent needs such as land-mine clearance and poor conditions throughout country. More aid was needed, and time was of the essence.
Organization of work
ANTONIO ARENALES FORNO (Guatemala) said the issue of human rights violations in specific countries, item 9, had been mentioned in the morning's debate, when this agenda item had been referred to as rife with politicization, selectivity and lack of objectivity. Although the process of citing specific countries could be improved, it was within item 9 that the Commission had made its greatest achievements. If situations in each country were not studied there could be no progress. The situation in Guatemala was known throughout the United Nations through studies and through the work of Special Rapporteurs and independent experts. The Commission's efforts had been useful in promoting the democratic process in Guatemala, even though there were still some difficulties in the country in the application of all aspects of human rights. There was no point in eliminating or annulling a procedure simply because it had certain failings -- rather, it must be improved.
Concerning the participation of non-governmental organizations, in Guatemala they were part of the consultative process, helping and improving the protection and promotion of human rights. He supported any proposal that non-governmental organizations join in the discussion and the work of the Commission.
Rights of reply
A Representative of Thailand, speaking in right of reply, said that in response to the speech of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Sweden earlier today, Thailand wished to say that the death penalty was maintained in Thailand because of the general wishes of the Thai people. Thailand had always exercised the greatest caution with regard to the exercise of the death penalty. Various safeguards existed and the Thai Parliament was currently considering changes to the Penal Code in order to replace execution by a firing squad with the use of lethal injection, and to prohibit subjecting persons under 18 years old and pregnant women to the death penalty. Moreover, even before these changes, none of this category of people had been executed up to now. In fact, so far in 2002 no executions had been carried out at all.
A Representative of Palestine, speaking in right of reply, said the representative of Israel had not mentioned any principles of human rights in his statement. He had spoken about terrorism and anti-Semitism. But it was the Government of Israel itself which practised anti-Semitism and terrorism against the Palestinian people, who were being killed on a daily basis. Israel used all kinds of weapons against the Palestinians. For 30 years, it had not abided for one single day with any of the resolutions of the Commission. As a matter of fact, Israel almost despised the Commission. How could the members of the Commission hail a representative of a country who despised the Commission? The Israeli occupation and the massacre of Palestinians were the reasons for human rights violations in Palestine.
A Representative of Lebanon, speaking in right to reply, said this afternoon's speech by the Israeli Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs had been pitiful. Israel seemed to be claiming to be a victim even though Israel was the occupying power of Palestinian and Arab land. Resistance was legitimate until the Israeli occupation came to an end. Israel was not a victim, in fact Israel was responsible for blowing up ambulances as well as the Palestinian Authority headquarters. It was all pitiful.
A Representative of Zimbabwe, speaking in right of reply, said that despite the fact that African nations had made a clear judgment accepting the outcome of the Zimbabwean elections as legitimate, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Sweden, who made an intervention this morning, gave the impression that only Sweden could approve elections in Zimbabwe and in Africa in general. It was condescending, and clearly inspired by notions of white supremacy. The delegation looked forward to the time when the Commission would work in an atmosphere of cooperation and understanding.
A Representative of Israel, speaking in right of reply, said Lebanon had yet to fulfil its responsibility for ensuring security in southern Lebanon in compliance with relevant Security Council resolutions. Lebanon allowed terrorist groups such as Hizbollah to operate freely from its southern territory. Three Israelis were recently abducted and were still missing and six Israelis recently had been killed by Hizbollah. Israeli counter actions against acts of Palestinian terror were a direct result of the Palestinian leadership's decision to resort to violence instead of negotiation. It was legitimate to dream about peace, but terrorism was prohibited under international law under any circumstances.
A Representative of India, speaking in right to reply, said that in the statement made by Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Pakistan had clearly been exploiting the Organization in an attempt at furthering its own agenda. Jammu and Kashmir were parts of India, occupied illegally by Pakistan. Even throughout the recent glare of publicity on Pakistan, that country had continued to support terrorist activities targeted towards India. The calls for dialogue from the Pakistani delegate sounded hollow. India had a tradition of warm ties with all OIC States and hoped that they would not allow their platform to be abused for Pakistan's selfish ends.
A Representative of Sudan, speaking in right of reply, responded to the address of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada by saying that human rights violations that still occurred in Sudan were the result of a civil war. There were no systematic violations of human rights in Sudan, and Canada could help Sudan to end this war.
A Representative of Palestine , in a second right of reply, said Israel was occupying Palestinian land. The occupation was a serious violation of human rights. Occupation and combat were two sides of the same coin.
A Representative of Sweden, speaking in right of reply, said he was usually unwilling to enter into the often-sterile debate of right of replies. However, when representatives went overboard, he felt forced to react. The representative of Zimbabwe had made an accusation that the Swedish Foreign Minister had made racist remarks. She had in fact quoted the Secretary-General when saying that human rights were fundamental and belonged to humanity itself. When speaking on the elections in Zimbabwe she had meant to say that these were rights that people from Zimbabwe should also be able to enjoy.
A Representative of Belarus, speaking in right of reply, said he wished to say in response to the remarks of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Sweden that no one could be above the law, not even journalists if they committed crimes. Belarus was a country with democratic institutions and an elected president.
A Representative of Lebanon said Lebanon speaking in second right of reply, did not require advice from Israel to remind it of its duty. It was Israel which had attacked Lebanon and needed to be brought to order.
A Representative of Zimbabwe, in a second right of reply, said Sweden was still being condescending.
A Representative of Israel, in a second right of reply, said that Israel had withdrawn from Lebanon in May 2000. Secondly, Israel knew exactly where the Hizbollah terrorists had entered the country and who had sent them. To the Palestinian delegate he said that nothing justified terrorism, absolutely nothing. There were two ways to end what was labelled terrorism, through violence or negotiation. An agreement had been close, and it was not too late. There had been too much suffering on both sides.


* *** *