HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS CONTINUE, NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS REPORT

AFTERNOON
HR/CN/99/51
21 April 1999



National Institutions Tell Commission on Human Rights
of Progress Made, Problems Faced


National institutions for human rights told the Commission on Human Rights this afternoon of efforts to improve matters in their home countries, but also said they faced such difficulties as scarce resources, limited influence, and challenges -- such as internal armed insurrections -- over which they had little control.

Although the international community employed a vast infrastructure of human rights treaties, programmes, and support services, the number of human- rights violations was still troublingly high, several national institutions said.

A representative of Colombia's Defensor del Pueblo said international humanitarian law was regularly violated by paramilitary groups and armed guerrilla bands which committed such offences as recruiting children under 15 into their ranks. There was no Government policy to violate human rights, but there also was no policy to avoid violations, the representative said.

And a representative of the Canadian Human Rights Commission said violations of the rights of women, racial and religious minorities, indigenous peoples, disabled peoples, war victims, and the impoverished remained widespread across the world.

Their remarks came as the Commission on Human Rights continued to discuss its agenda item on the effective functioning of human-rights mechanisms.

There were successes. The South African Human Rights Commission talked of leaving the ''inequality bequeathed by apartheid'' behind by enacting proposed legislation that would allow it to implement the International Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, a product of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, expressed hope that a new era in the protection of human rights was dawning in that country. The representative said the Secretary of State, who had oversight over the Commission, was ensuring that the body represented every segment of society.

Other institutions detailed their efforts to promote and protect human rights in their countries, their regions, and internationally. They maintained that human rights in various areas of the world -- Asia\Pacific and Latin America among them -- were being better protected because of heightened coordination among countries.

The Czech Republic was the only country to address the Commission.

The following national institutions spoke: Federacion Ibero-Americana de Ombudsman; International Ombudsman Institute; Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions; Danish Centre for Human Rights; Observatoire national des droits de l'homme (Algeria); National Human Rights Commission of India; Defensor del Pueblo (Columbia); Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission; Uganda Human Rights Commission; South African Human Rights Commission; Conseil Consultatif des Droits de l'Homme du Royaume du Maroc; Commission Nationale des Droits de l'Homme (Togo); Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission of Australia; Canadian Human Rights Commission; National Commission of Mexico; National Commission on Human Rights and Freedom (Cameroon): Procuradoria para la defensa de los derechos humanos de El Salvador; Philippines Human Rights Commission; Commission superieure des droits de l'homme et des libertes fondamentales de Tunisie; New Zealand Human Rights Commission; National Human Rights Commission (Nigeria); and Indonesian National Commission on Human Rights.

The non-governmental organizations Asian Legal Resource Centre and Asian Cultural Forum on Development also delivered addresses.

The Commission will continue its debate on the functioning of human rights mechanisms at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 22 April.

Statements

FERNANDO DE MIRANDA Y TORRES, of Federacion-Ibero-Americana de Ombudsman, said the Federation was created several years ago to ensure institutional cooperation and better defence of human rights in Latin America. The supervision of public administrations was one of the chief tasks of the Federation. In its work it addressed issues surrounding indigenous persons, elderly who needed care, migrants who suffered from xenophobia, children who were forced into premature work, and human-rights defenders who suffered harassment.

The mission of the Federation was intentionally broad. There had already been three congresses, and a fourth was planned soon. Around November 20, the group hoped to convene in Madrid to discuss the rights of the child. An invitation to attend had been extended to the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

JORGE LUIS, of International Ombudsman Institute, said the Institute had fifty years of fruitful work behind it. It covered all ombudsmen of the world. Countries had been incorporated within the Institute with the aim of protecting and defending human rights. The Institute had six regions: Europe, Africa, Australasia, Latin America, the Caribbean, and North America. This ensured that citizens had access to defence of their rights.

The Institute had gone beyond the strict limits set at its creation, notably in its defence of the right to life, and social, cultural and economic rights. This was important, particularly at a moment when States had withdrawn from these issues. The Institute represented those who had no voice.

KIERAN FITZPATRICK, of Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, said the Forum had been established in July 1996 following a regional workshop in Australia. At the time there were four national human-rights commissions in the Asia/Pacific region. Shortly thereafter, two other organizations joined. The key issues taken up by the Forum were review of foreign activities, review of regional human-rights issues, study of developments at the international level, and consideration of the effect of economic issues relating to human-rights issues.

At the next session, high priority would be placed on women’s and children's rights. It was clear that the needs of refugees had to be better met. Other countries in the region had announced that they were establishing national human-rights institutions, and some countries were establishing human-rights commissions.

IDA KOCK NIELSEN, of Danish Centre for Human Rights, said recognition of the special insights and expertise of national institutions and their contributions to the United Nations was an important step. Some institutions in countries still in political turmoil had a hard task, for the dialogue on human rights was still new. Regardless of the situation, most had found means of adapting so that the protection of human rights was enriched by these new angles. The Paris principles were important as a basis for work in this area and should be further recognised. The independence of national institutions was reinforced by these principles. Regional networks of national organizations should be strengthened, notably financially. The lack of funding was grave. It was first and foremost the work of the State to fund these institutions, but this was not always the case.

The Danish Centre for Human Rights ensured continuous fulfilment of obligations contained in international treaties. Where refugees and migrants were concerned, there appeared to be difficulties in conforming legislation to their rights and needs, both in Denmark and in other parts of Western Europe.

K. REZAG-BARA, of Observatoire National des Droits de l’Homme, said since it was founded seven years ago, the Human Rights Monitoring Body (ONDH), as an Algerian national institution for human-rights promotion and protection, proud of its participation to the work of the Commission on Human Rights, had been strengthening its position within the institutional landscape and bolstering its role as a monitoring, early warning and consulting body for human rights. At the same time, Algeria continued to face the terrorist criminality of armed groups known and identified as criminal bands without political project nor religious cover nor popular support. These armed groups committed the most abominable crimes against freestanding civil populations.

The ONDH denounced these inhuman crimes, and it remained attentive to developments in the struggle against terrorist criminality and sought to create mechanisms to enhance the rule of law. The strengthening of the independence of the judiciary and the extension of the efficiency of judicial control on all phases of penal proceedings against persons suspected of terrorist or subversive activities were an indispensable normative guarantee for the rule of law.

VIRENDRA DAYAL, of National Human Rights Commission of India, said the group was grateful to the High Commissioner for arrangements to include national institutions in the work of the Commission. It hoped this practice would become the norm. The national institutions had a voice and competence that were distinct from both Governments and non-governmental organizations. National institutions were working closely and constructively together, assisting each other through the exchange of ideas, personnel and experience. India had been honoured to chair for the past three years the International Coordination Committee of the National Institutions. These institutions were devoid of the political divisiveness that had often marred and set back the global cause of human rights.

In the five and a half years of its existence, the Indian Commission had received some 120,000 complaints, of which 40,000 had been registered in the past 12 months alone. By March 31, 1999, all but 20,000 complaints had been considered and dealt with. The Commission’s annual reports to Parliament and monthly newsletters gave full and graphic accounts of citizens’ preoccupations, the more sensitive of which related to issues of custodial violence, prison and police reform, acts of violence against Dalits, and the protection of rights of women and minorities. The National Commission had been deeply shocked and pained by attacks on members of the Christian community in certain states of India.

JOSE CASTRO CAYCEDO, of Defensor del Pueblo (Columbia), said human rights were violated in Columbia due to a lack of social justice and because of widespread poverty, political violence, and armed conflict. There was no Government policy to violate human rights, but there also was no policy to avoid violations of human rights. Breaches of international humanitarian law were being committed by paramilitaries, armed guerrillas, and, at times, by the armed forces. The civil population often had got caught in the crossfire, and that had led to death and injury. Armed groups were allowed to recruit children under 15, clearly a breach of international humanitarian law. The UN should review the law so that no child under 18 could be recruited in armed conflicts.

The situation in Colombia was due to the weakness of the State, which was unable to assume responsibility for the comprehensive protection of civil, political, social, economic, cultural, and environmental rights. In 1998, Defensor del Pueblo had received 65,686 petitions from people who wanted their rights protected or defended. The sheer number showed that the situation was still serious. The Government had not followed the recommendations of international human-rights organizations, such as adoption of a national human-rights plan or implementation of effective measures to avoid displacement. Also, there were no measures to protect defenders of human rights.

BRICE DICKSON, of Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, said a new day was dawning in Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission had seven duties, among them the promotion of understanding and awareness of the importance of human rights in Northern Ireland, and the duty to advise the Secretary of State and the Executive Committee of the Northern Ireland Assembly on measures to be taken to protect human rights. It also had four important powers, including the launching of proceedings involving the protection of human rights and the publication of advice and of the outcomes of its research.

The Commission was aware of the limited nature of its powers of investigation but would fully test them before coming to a decision on whether additional powers were needed. It was still devising a strategic plan. There was a lot to be done in Northern Ireland, and priority concerns would be selected carefully, but the thrust would be towards ensuring that everybody in Northern Ireland benefitted from a higher degree of human-rights protection than before. The Commission had already submitted its views to the Government on what changes should be made to the emergency laws in Northern Ireland. It would do all in its power to underpin justice and the rule of law in a society that had been troubled for too long by violence and inequity.

MARGARET SEKAGGAYA, of Uganda Human Rights Commission, said the issues that affected Uganda included external interference, urban terrorism, rebel groups, HIV/AIDS, corruption, and political-party restrictions. The positive aspects of the human-rights situation included a conducive environment, a universal primary education policy, a vibrant civil society and the Uganda Human Rights Commission. Uganda was a poor landlocked country surrounded by five countries; instability in one of the neighbouring countries affected Uganda in form of refugees and cross-border incursions leading to loss of life and property.

There was urban terrorism where bombs had been thrown at innocent people who had either died or sustained injuries. Also there were rebel armed groups which continued to be active in some northern and western parts of Uganda. The presence of these rebel groups had led to internal displacements. Also there had been dissenting views expressed by some people who regarded restrictions on political parties as violations of human rights. Regarding HIV/AIDS, there was awareness of the deadly virus. Ugandans were doing whatever they could to promote human rights.

BARNEY PITYANA, of South African Human Rights Commission, said it was pleasing to see that countries had followed the recommendation of the High Commissioner by making national institutions a priority. Last year at an African conference on human rights, attendance had increased significantly from the first such meeting in 1996. Participants adopted the Durban Declaration calling for further establishment of national institutions and declaring that human rights were best promoted in an environment consisting of thriving democracy, an independent judiciary, and good governance.

In South Africa, a National Action Plan for Human Rights had been adopted. One thing the plan did was establish the National Consultative Forum on Human Rights, chaired by the Ministry of Justice, which would better coordinate human-rights policy within the Government. The country recognized that education and training were essential for developing a culture of human rights. Later this year, the country would address the legacy of inequality bequeathed by apartheid and white minority rule by passing legislation to promote and advance equality.

DRISS DAHAK, of Conseil Consultatif des droits de l’homme du Royaume du Maroc, said the Council had representatives from all categories of Moroccan society -- civil, political, professional, and governmental. The Council promoted a dialogue of tolerance and had been able to achieve much in its nine years of existence, including the guarantee of fundamental freedoms in certain areas of human rights. It had achieved the release of political prisoners in Morocco as well as of all detainees for crimes of ideology, although these two categories were very small.

It had organized symposiums on freedom of the press and the rights of the child, among other topics. Enormous efforts had been made for all detainees. The Council had proposed that the King of Morocco grant amnesty to 28 detainees. It had studied all the international documentation on disappeared persons and had been able to apply international criteria to cases of the disappeared in Morocco. It had established an arbitration body to set compensation in such cases. The Council had been encouraged to continue in this direction in a letter from the King

KOMI GNONDOLI, of Commission nationale des droits de l’Homme - Togo, said the Commission had made every effort to fulfill its mandate in the interest of the Togolese people. Its activities were numerous. It had played an essential role by providing opinions upon queries and had verified allegations of human-rights violations. It had initiated daily instruction in human rights and had investigated violations, whatever their nature. It had attempted to breathe new life into activities for promoting human rights. Many sensitization programmes had taken place. Education was one of the main foci of the Commission’s efforts. The results of the Commission were encouraging, but needed to be improved.

The Commission had a fruitful relationship with the United Nations. Internationally, the interdependence of economic, cultural and social rights was often affirmed, but there was a gap between theory and practice. All countries needed to take note of this.

CHRIS SIDOTI, of Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission of Australia, said global and regional cooperation had expanded and many national institutions for human rights had been established. As a result, the Paris Principles were increasingly important as an internationally endorsed benchmark. It was now widely recognized that national institutions should be established in conformity with the Paris Principles. Compliance with the Principles was now monitored by an accreditation process set out in the Rules of the International Coordinating Committee.

Primary responsibility for monitoring compliance with international human-rights treaty obligations lay with Member States. National institutions that complied with the Paris Principles were independent and non-partisan, comprised of human rights experts possessing comprehensive local knowledge. They had the capacity to provide the best possible advice to States on their human-rights commitments and requirements. Their views should not be dismissed lightly. National human-rights institutions that complied with the Paris Principles were important resources to help States to honour their promises to their own people to respect and protect human rights. States were free to ignore this advice, but did so at their own cost and to their own detriment.

MICHELLE FALARDEAU-RAMSAY, of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, said last year’s international conference in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, had given birth to the Edmonton Declaration calling on States to sign or ratify International Covenants and other international human-rights instruments and to subscribe to optional protocols designed to monitor implementation of those instruments. It also called on all States to ensure the protection of human rights by enacting domestic legislation. Individuals, States, and human-rights institutions had to be vigilant every day to make sure human rights were actively promoted and vigorously defended.

Despite international treaties, the women of this world did not share equally in political, economic, social, or cultural life, and often suffered violence, abuse, and subjugation. Racial and religious minorities faced discrimination. Aboriginal peoples had been and continued to be torn from their homelands and dispossessed of their languages and cultures. People with disabilities faced daily challenges in their quest to participate fully in society. And innocent victims of war and uprisings were forced to flee their homes and families and seek safety in other countries. These problems happened everywhere, and human-rights progress was measured in how such difficulties were resolved, day by day.

MARIO BETTATI, of Commission Nationale Consultative des Droits de l’Homme - France, said the Commission was an independent body where the different issues preoccupying the French people found a voice: religious issues, political issues, philosophical issues and linked issues. The Commission had the ability to take up issues independently and could therefore express opinions relevant at the national or international levels. The manifesto of the Commission noted that victims of violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms suffered in the same manner, wherever the location and whatever the motive for the violations. The universality of human rights should correspond to the universality of human suffering.

The Manifesto also confirmed that respect for all human rights should be applied in all places and all circumstances. For those peoples deprived of their fundamental rights, the solidarity of the international community was more than ever indispensable in order to prevent economic and social apartheid.

MIREILLE ROCCATTI, of Comision Nacional de Mexico, said the Commission worked to solve human-rights problems in Mexico and to investigate complaints of violations. There were also 32 local commissions that acted in concert with the National Commission. It was apparent that the task was unfinished.

The work of the Commission had been reported in several publications. Since 1991, it had attended several international workshops to promote human rights. In November 1997, Mexico had hosted a workshop where national institutions were given the status to appear as forums independent of governmental members. In 1996, a bilateral agreement had been reached between the Mexican and Canadian National Commissions to share information.

SOLOMON NFOR GWEI, of the National Commission on Human Rights (Cameroon), said the Commission had concentrated its efforts in four key areas: strengthening capacity, enhancing promotion and protection activities, promoting national cooperation, and promoting international cooperation. The need to strengthen the Commission remained pressing -- enhancing its powers would enable it to function more effectively. It now had three senior-level employees for promotion, protection, and administration. It recently had received two desktop computers, a laser printer, and a computer programme for the processing of complaints. The Commission had hosted seminars, workshops, conferences, and radio and television commercials on different aspects of human rights, including protection of women, children, and minorities.

The job of the Commission was to investigate complaints and incidents of alleged violations of human rights and to conduct impromptu inspections of police stations, cells, prisons, and hospitals. Last year, the Commission had received 1,340 complaints and petitions, the highest number it had received since its creation. In 1998, the Commission's work had led to a number of victims being released from arbitrary arrest, detention, and torture. One of its main problems was a lack of resources. Any assistance would do much to foster the work of the Commission.


EDUARDO P. POLANCO, of Procuradoria para la defensa de los derechos humanas de El Salvador, said there were no gross violations of human rights in El Salvador such as had occurred in the past. However, when violations did occur they often went under the banner of impunity. There was a need for greater respect of the right to life of El Salvadorans. Monitoring by NGOs of human-rights violations had grown, and efforts had been made to conquer those segments of society which still wanted to exploit their situations of power. The exercise of economic, cultural and social rights needed to be protected, and it was necessary to foster dialogue and discussion among the different sectors of society and to show the results achieved to the Government.

The Procuradoria had investigated many allegations. The debate on human rights was held daily by the media, and so understanding of human rights was spreading. All had to work towards sensitizing the Government to carry out an economic policy that would enhance the rights of the people. Human-rights education needed to be included at all levels of schooling.

AURORA NAVARRETE-RECINA, of Philippine Commission on Human Rights (PCHR), said that with the creation of Commission in May 1987, human-rights education had become a multi-sectoral and multi-dimensional system. In developing a comprehensive approach to human-rights education (HRE), the Commission had launched a programme for the police-military -- the sector considered a major determinant of the human-rights situation in the country. Consequently the Commission's Education and Training Office had been broadened to include academe, special-interest groups such as the Filipino workers and professionals, and even insurgents.

In April 1994 the Commission had defined its plan of action for the UN Decade for Human Rights Education (1995-2004). It aimed, among other things, at achieving a 100 per cent human-rights literacy rate throughout the Philippines, particularly among youth. At the national level the PCHR had endeavoured to establish and strengthen its relationship with groups both within and outside Government. At the regional level the PCHR continued to work closely with other national institutions in the Asia-Pacific region.

RACHID DRISS, of Commission superieure des droits de l’homme et des libertes fondamentales de Tunisie, said the Tunisian Commission was trying to carry out its mandate both on the international and national levels, and was satisfied by the positive results it had achieved, despite needing more support. It was reinforcing international instruments and was making them part of Tunisian reality. The Tunisian Government was implementing measures to enhance human rights, responding to the preoccupations of the Tunisian Commission. These measures pertained to the characteristics of administrative detention and proposed amendments to the penal code regarding torture, for example.

Economic, cultural and social rights were also at the forefront of the Commission’s agenda. The Commission and the rest of Tunisia shared hope for new gains in the field of human rights.

PAMELA JEFFRIES, of Human Rights Commission of New Zealand, said the Commission was committed to assisting the New Zealand Government achieve the objectives of national human-rights institutions. During 1998 the Commission had reported to the Government of New Zealand on inconsistencies between legislation, regulations, practices and policies of the New Zealand Government and the provisions of New Zealand human-rights legislation and the spirit and intent of that legislation as expressed in International Covenants and Conventions the Government had ratified. These actions had formed an excellent basis for the development of a National Plan of Action for Human Rights in New Zealand.

To date, formal human-rights education had not formed part of the New Zealand school curriculum, although, subject to funding, it should be introduced this year. Another building block was better delivery of economic, social and cultural rights. In working to realize the right to development, all needed to remember that pockets of need and vulnerability existed even in the most developed States.

P.K. NWOKEDI, of National Human Rights Commission of Nigeria, said the Commission had been established 1996 and since then had developed a beneficial working relationship with both local and international NGOs dealing with human rights. The Commission was intended to facilitate extra-judicial recognition, promotion and protection of all rights. It was empowered, among other things, to deal with all matters relating to the protection of human rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of Nigeria and various international instruments; to monitor and investigate all alleged human-rights violations in Nigeria and make appropriate recommendations to the Government on how to respond; and to assist victims and seek appropriate redress and remedies on their behalf.

By the end of 1998, the Commission had received and presented a total of 224 cases before its Governing Council. Out of these the Commission had successfully concluded 190 cases.

MAYZUKI DARUSMAN, of the Indonesian National Human Rights Commission, said human rights were a primary source of social and political change. It was the dynamic interplay between the human rights and democratic movements, mainly activated by students, and the force of international economic imperatives, that had resulted in the dramatic liberating political changes that had taken place in Indonesia in May 1998. The overriding question now was how to institutionalize the country’s resurgent democracy.

Major strides had been achieved in terms of the national establishment of human-rights norms. However, the contrast between ideals and reality remained stark, and efforts still needed to be made to achieve observance of the whole range of internationally acknowledged basic human rights. The Asia Pacific region should soon see the establishment of new human-rights national institutions in Malaysia and Thailand. Renewed interest in engaging in human-rights discourse was also apparent in other countries of the region.


MIROSLAV SOMOL (Czech Republic) said the country was committed to developing a national mechanism to monitor human rights. The Government had pledged to ensure that authorities monitored human-rights violations and provided effective protection against any contravention of fundamental human rights and freedoms. It also had pledged to ensure that Czech laws were consistent with the national Constitution and with international human-rights treaties.

The Czech Republic was working hard to honour commitments arising from regional European conventions it had ratified. However, regarding compliance with the universal United Nations instruments, failures had been registered again and again. The Government had sought to create institutional and organizational conditions to change this, the key institutional change being the creation of a Government advisory body, the Human Rights Council. Its primary mission was to monitor human rights and fundamental freedoms under international instruments and treaties, to submit comments to the Government, and to propose measures for improvement.

SANJEEWA LIYANAGE, of Asian Legal Resource Center, said the international community had contributed much to the promotion of national institutions for the protection and promotion of human rights. However, it was important that national human-rights institutions live up to the expectations of civil society. The international community needed to help them move from their initial stage to a more advanced stage so that they could win the public's confidence and serve a useful purpose. There was also the general criticism that these institutions were used to better the image of Governments before the international community rather than effectively to protect and promote human rights locally.

Part of the difficulty in developing these institutions lay in the general inability to apply international jurisprudence on human rights to the local situations. For example, international jurisprudence on torture had developed enormously over the last few decades due to international recognition of several principles. The judgments of the House of Lords on the Pinochet case had summed up those developments. However, local legal institutions in many countries had not assimilated these developments.

AYSA MAGO, of Asian Cultural Forum for Development, said it welcomed the formation of national human rights institutions (NHRI), yet justice, protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms remained to be realized in a substantive manner. Human-rights groups in India, Asia and the rest of the world were aware that a large majority of human-rights abuses were committed by armed forces in internal conflict areas. The Government of India needed to revisit the issue of armed forces enjoying impunity.

Another issue was the failure of Governments to implement decisions and recommendations of NHRIs. In January 1996, the Supreme Court of India, on a petition filed by the NHRI, directed the Central Government of India and the State government of Arunachal Pradesh to process citizenship applications of Chakmas and Hajongs indigenous peoples. More than three years had elapsed without these being processed. The Asian Cultural Forum looked forward to the early formulation of national plans of action on human rights and hoped that the necessary democratic space for civil-society participation would be provided for in such plans.

CORRIGENDUM

In press release HR/CN/99/48 of 20 April 1999, the statement of Costa Rica on page 12 should read as follows:

NORA RUIZ DE ANGULO (Costa Rica) said the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasized the global commitment to the right to life. This would be in vain if States continued to take life. Moral reasons or internal security were not enough to justify the application of the death penalty, but the question of the right or power of the State to take the life of a citizen was. The international community had come far during the century on this issue. Costa Rica had abolished the death penalty in 1887 because its people were convinced of the value of life and human dignity. All countries that had not yet abolished the death penalty should work to that end. It was asked that the death penalty against any Costa Rican citizen abroad be commuted to life imprisonment. In many countries, there were pressures for re-establishment of the death penalty, mostly the result of disinformation upon a supposed corroboration between crime and the death penalty. The penalty did not have any effect on crime rates.