SPEAKERS AT HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL’S HIGH-LEVEL
SEGMENT STRESS NEED FOR STRICT IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE FORUM’S DECISIONS, FAIR INSTITUTION-BUILDING
13 March 2007
Human Rights Council
AFTERNOON
HRC/07/6
13 March 2007
Issues concerning the need for the strict implementation of the Human Rights Council’s decisions, the indivisibility, universality and interdependence of all human rights, and the building of the Council’s institutions were among those raised by a series of dignitaries speaking this afternoon in the high-level segment of the Council.
Jean-Marie Atangana Mebara, Minister of State at the Ministry for Foreign Relations of Cameroon, said the Human Rights Council was the forum in which all human rights abuses must be addressed. It was also the forum in which they were called upon, without leniency, to provide solutions to the various threats posed to human rights in the world. Cameroon also wished to recall that the right to development was an integral part of human rights, which was fundamental to ensuring the enjoyment of other rights.
Elmar Mammadyarov, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan, said at this formative stage, serious thought should be given to devising the necessary mechanisms to watchdog the strict implementation of the Council’s decisions. Unfortunately, the experience of the first nine months gave every reason to ponder seriously this aspect of the Council’s work.
Mohamed Ali Elmardi, Minister of Justice of Sudan, said that due to the non-participation of two of the five members of the high-level mission on Darfur, it was no longer valid and could therefore not be in a position to effectively and objectively discharge its mandate. Sudan therefore strongly and resolutely opposed any consideration by the Council of any report coming out of this mission.
Mehmet Aydin, Minister of State of Turkey, said the establishment of the new Human Rights Council was a milestone in the long journey of human freedom and security. The task of the Council was to make sure that the jurisprudence created was observed and respected, and to this end, the Council should be a society of the committed, and should reflect the universality of human rights.
Patrick A. Chinamasa, Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs of Zimbabwe, said in spite of machinations by some non-governmental organizations and international media organizations to undermine the Government of Zimbabwe, the country was firmly committed to human rights as shown by its accession to the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights. Negotiations were under way to set up a National Commission on Human Rights to complement the work of the Office of the Ombudsman and broader constitutional provisions.
Torki Bin Mohammed Bin Saud Al-Kabeer, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs of Saudi Arabia, said recent years had shown that the crises from which the international community was suffering were attributable to a lack of balanced human rights dialogue and the existence of irresponsible tendencies that were doing their utmost to exploit the present situation, with a view to the incitement of conflict, racial discrimination and discrimination based on religion or belief in order to further certain aims that were totally inconsistent with the principles of human rights. A judicious and careful approach should be adopted to overcome this crisis, with the minimum of detriment and losses, through tolerance, dialogue and rejection of discrimination in all its forms.
Nezar Albaharna, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Bahrain, said that through its membership and activities in the Human Rights Council, Bahrain worked continuously to promote and protect human rights, which were a priority of its interior and exterior policies. On the national level, the country had embarked on a reform programme, which had been designed to protect and promote human rights, the rule of law and to respect fundamental freedoms.
Ana Trisic-Babic, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina, said it was expected that the Council would be able to finalise soon the consideration of establishing and implementing a new system of Universal Periodic Review as a credible and effective mechanism which would improve the situation of those most in need of protection, and at the same time assist all States in their efforts to fully implement their human rights obligations in a cooperative manner, and based on interactive dialogue.
Alexander Yakovenko, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, said that no one could deny that one of the most acute problems was ethnic discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, which continued to mutate and reshape into new ugly forms. During the past few years that phenomenon had become global indeed, affecting even those countries that regarded themselves as successful in terms of their observance of human rights. For that reason, Russia considered it inadmissible that some members of the international community preferred to keep silent and ignore the processes in their own neighbourhood that directly or indirectly contributed to the promotion of nationalist ideology.
Ian Mccartny, Minister for International Human Rights of the United Kingdom, said eight months after the work of the Council had begun, the abuse of human rights continued. The Council’s attention had been urgently needed, and the United Kingdom firmly supported the Council’s focus on the appalling situation in Darfur. The Council could and should do better: it should do all it could, working with the Governments concerned wherever possible, to ensure greater respect in practice for the human rights that were discussed in theory within the United Nations. The respect was alarmingly lacking in some countries.
Alexandros N. Zenon, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs of Cyprus, said the establishment of the Human Rights Council was a milestone in further strengthening the United Nations human rights machinery. The Council should continue promoting, in a sustained and result-oriented manner, a sincere dialogue and cooperation in human rights, divorced from political controversies and double standards. Cyprus, as a country whose priority lay in upholding the rule of law and the full respect for human rights, would like to see the Human Rights Council fulfil its mandate and lead to human rights improvements on the ground.
Joao Alves Monteiro, Vice Minister of Justice of Angola, said that the establishment of the Human Rights Council was one of the most important successes of the United Nations lately. Nevertheless, the balance of this first year of the Council demonstrated that the objectives that made the creation of this organ could be compromised because there was still the tendency to politicise its deliberations and decisions while using two heights and two measures.
Sid Ahmed Ould El Bou, Commissioner for Human Rights and the Fight Against Poverty of Mauritania, said proper presidential elections in an atmosphere of peace, freedom and transparency had recently taken place in Mauritania. The establishment of good governance and the foundations for democracy in collaboration with political partners and civil society had taken place there through numerous constitutional and political developments. Mauritania was confident it would have the support of the international community and Human Rights Council in these improvements.
Mathias Meinrad Chikawe, Deputy Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs of Tanzania, said it was unbecoming for any country to preach human rights abroad while violating them at home. They had to do away with double standards, selectivity and politicisation of human rights for such an approach would only jeopardise the resolve to end impunity in the world. What was considered unacceptable to one country should not be treated differently in relation to others; else the principle of equality would become meaningless.
Pham Binh Minh, Assistant Foreign Minister of Viet Nam, said the Council had been going through its first year, taking difficult steps in its efforts to carry out the commitment to provide equal treatment to both civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights, the right to development, as well as the commitment not to allow confrontational approaches, exploitation of human rights for political purposes, selective targeting of individual countries for extraneous consideration, and double standards in the conduct of its work. However, there was concern that the trend of politicisation and confrontation had continued.
Anders B. Johnsson, Secretary-General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), said members of Parliament could do much to raise awareness of human rights and steer resources towards it. In this, the IPU had worked closely with national parliaments in the field of human rights, and parliaments and the IPU alike recognized the value of work carried out under the Council’s Special Procedures and the guidance provided by Special Rapporteurs on implementing human rights standards. These procedures should be continued.
Carmen Moreno, Director of the United Nations International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women, said inequality in access to resources, salaries and services demonstrated the kind of structural discrimination women endured. While 48 per cent of migrants were women, and many contributed directly to the economies of their home countries by sending remittances home to their families, discrimination and violations of human rights remained among migrant women, and a perspective on human rights that acknowledged migrants’ rights was key to protecting human rights and attaining the Millennium Development Goals.
The Council will resume its work at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 14 March to conclude its high-level segment.
Statements
JEAN-MARIE ATANGANA MEBARA, Minister of State at the Ministry for Foreign Relations of Cameroon, said that the profound changes that the United Nations had systematically and determinedly undertaken to reinforce international legal norms in the area of human rights constituted marked progress in upholding the great values of civilization. Cameroon wished here to express its profound satisfaction at the recent adoption and opening for signature of the International Convention against Forced Disappearances, which was a fitting tribute to those who had disappeared as well as their families, who would now benefit from the "right to know". That development was all the more welcome given that President Biya of Cameroon had made the promotion and protection of human rights one of the principal themes of his policy of modernization in the country when he came to power in 1982.
Unfortunately, the past year had been marred by events that had compromised the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the world, and several hotbeds continued including the Middle East, which remained a troubled zone; the fact that Iraq had not found that path to peace; and the numerous conflicts that continued to rage on the African continent, which gave rise to the loss of numerous lives and provoked the displacement of persons, despite interventions by the United Nations and the African Union. The Human Rights Council had not ceased to demonstrate its concern on those issues, as testified to by the different special sessions they had undertaken, and the solutions proposed, despite the mixed results with regard to their implementation. The Human Rights Council was the forum in which all human rights abuses must be addressed, and also the forum in which they were called upon, without leniency, to provide solutions to the various threats posed to human rights in the world. Cameroon also wished to recall that the right to development was an integral part of human rights, which was fundamental to ensuring the enjoyment of other rights. The international community had therefore more than ever to accord equal priority to the promotion of an adequate standard of living, and a healthy environment for the flowering of the well being of individuals.
ELMAR MAMMADYAROV, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan, said while talking about credibility, it should be realised that it started with safeguarding self-respect and that meant providing for strict scrutiny over the implementation of its own decisions, which should be seen as a sine qua non for its survival and which would ensure consistency and subsequent efficiency of the Human Rights Council. At this formative stage, serious thought should be given to devising the necessary mechanisms to watchdog the strict implementation of the Council’s decisions. Unfortunately, the experience of the first nine months gave every reason to ponder seriously this aspect of the Council’s work. The instrumental and important role of the Special Procedures in the field of protection and promotion of human rights was recognised, and the necessity of dialogue, the main purpose of which should be to identify existing problems and shortcomings, should be underlined, and they should be addressed in the spirit of understanding and cooperation.
The work on the Expert Advisory Body should lead to necessary improvements and rationalisation of its contextual and principled nature to better serve the purpose of further development of human rights standards. On the Universal Periodic Review, the major challenge lay in ensuring the workability of this innovation in practice. The mechanism in the core of which rested the principle of universality with regard to both rights and freedoms as well as all States required effective structuring. On the agenda and methods of work, there were merits in a broad but streamlined agenda that would have as its object all human rights without exception. Two core principles, namely objectivity and non-discrimination, should guide the work of the Council to enable it to effectively address real human rights concerns whenever and wherever they occurred. The Council should be in a position to address gross and systematic human rights violations, whenever and by whomever these were committed. It was absolutely clear that without genuine political will on all sides, the solemn declarations of last year on the fresh start and new spirit of the Council were going to remain mere words.
MOHAMED ALI ELMARDI, Minister of Justice of Sudan, said that Sudan always followed a policy of transparency and open door in addressing all the human rights issues in the country on the firm belief that only constructive dialogue and sincere cooperation promoted and protected human rights in the country. Within the context of commitment and cooperation, the Government of Sudan had extended its invitations to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan, other United Nations mandate holders and many international non-governmental organizations to visit the country and work there. It had accepted the decision of the Council to dispatch a high-level mission to assess the human rights situation in Darfur and the needs of Sudan in this regard in order to engage into constructive dialogue. Sudan noticed that although it was agreed that the nomination of the members of the assessment mission to Darfur should be consultative, no engagement had been done in this direction. No consideration was paid to Sudan’s legitimate and objective and reliable information reservations and concerns, especially with regard to the preconceived judgment about the situation in Darfur and false projections of genocide. Sudan denounced the double standards practiced by this particular mission.
Due to the non-participation of two of its five members, the mission was no longer valid and could therefore not be in a position to effectively and objectively discharge its mandate. Sudan therefore strongly and resolutely opposed any consideration by the Council of any report coming out of this mission. The Government of Sudan had repeatedly announced and emphasized its firm willingness to reach a just, lasting and comprehensive solution to all problems in the Sudan. The more recent core steps taken in Darfur were among others the Darfur Peace Agreement, whose implementation was rapidly on the march, a higher number of seats in the Executive and the Legislature allocated to representatives of the signatory movements, the voluntarily return of 100.000 internally displaced persons and refugees to their original villages in the three Darfur states, and the conclusion of 95 intertribal reconciliations. In addition, the humanitarian situation was much more stable now and there was a visible decrease in malnutrition and mortality rates. Huge sums of money had been allocated and delivered to the newly formed Darfur Authority for the purposes of development and services. Sudan would like to reiterate its willingness to cooperate sincerely and earnestly with all efforts that aimed at supporting its government to bring peace and stability in the country.
MEHMET AYDIN, Minister of State of Turkey, said the establishment of the new Human Rights Council was a milestone in the long journey of human freedom and security. With the Council, the cause of human rights had entered a new era. For much of the past 60 years, the focus had been on articulating, codifying and enshrining rights, and this was now giving way to an era of implementation. The task of the Council was to make sure that the jurisprudence created was observed and respected, and to this end, the Council should be a society of the committed, and should reflect the universality of human rights. However, the task was not easy, for the United Nations was a body that reflected many diverse constituencies, voicing many diverse priorities, needs and hopes. Democracy was becoming more and more fragile in the so-called Western countries as well as in other parts of the world, at a time when the new and restored democracies were looking for better and more successful examples.
In a functioning human rights regime, integration ought to start in the public sphere that was largely defined by fundamental freedoms and rights which were considered “universal” in some sense. No one had the right to ask others to leave their cultural values behind in the process of integration. Security was a must, but democracy, which was based on human rights, was not only a governance of good and peaceful days. Security measures should be taken not in spite of human rights or democratic spirit, but in accordance with them. Democratic rights and values faced another threat that should not be left unmentioned: this was the rising wave of culturalism, which expressed itself through manifold arguments which claimed monopoly over human rights and the values that underlay them.
PATRICK A CHINAMASA, Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs of Zimbabwe, reiterated the indivisibility, universality and interdependence of human rights, and called for a balance between civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development. In twenty years, little had been achieved in terms of the right to development as a result of strident and sterile debate. Zimbabwe called for an efficient and effective Universal Periodic Review system, and adequate follow up and cooperation among concerned States. The election of mandate holders should be the preferred approach, so as to engender a sense of ownership among Member States and remove cultural bias and misgivings, and a code of conduct should be established.
In spite of machinations by some non-governmental organizations and international media organizations to undermine the Government of Zimbabwe, the country was firmly committed to human rights as shown by its accession to the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights. Negotiations were under way to set up a National Commission on Human Rights, to complement the work of the Office of the Ombudsman and broader constitutional provisions. The success of the Human Rights Council depended on the willingness of Member States to operate within the strictures on international human rights and humanitarian law. There should be no opportunity for countries to place themselves above those laws, and “holier than thou” attitudes coming before the Council should be met with steadfast deafness.
TORKI BIN MOHAMMED BIN SAUD AL-KABEER, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs of Saudi Arabia, said the establishment of a strong Council with practical human rights mechanisms necessitated consideration of the facts of history and the requirements of logic. It was impossible to act without regard for the factors underlying the momentous events that were taking place in many regions of the world, including the Middle East, and which had given rise to erroneous concepts and ideas that were inconsistent with the values and principles in which the peoples of the region believed. These misconceptions should be confronted in order to prevent them from adversely affecting the work of the Council. Human development, economic prosperity and political stability constituted the fundamental requirements for a better future for mankind as a whole, and any endeavours made to this end would inevitably support, strengthen, enhance and help to safeguard human rights.
Recent years had shown that the crises from which the international community was suffering were attributable to a lack of balanced human rights dialogue and the existence of irresponsible tendencies that were doing their utmost to exploit the present situation, with a view to the incitement of conflict, racial discrimination and discrimination based on religion or belief in order to further certain aims that were totally inconsistent with the principles of human rights. A judicious and careful approach should be adopted to overcome this crisis, with the minimum of detriment and losses, through tolerance, dialogue and rejection of discrimination in all its forms. The question of the Council’s institution building should be accorded sufficient time and effort at this crucial stage by making it one of its working priorities in order to address the important questions requiring action by the Council, such as the issues of poverty, globalisation, the right to development, and matters of direct concern to individuals.
NEZAR ALBAHARNA, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Bahrain, said that the agenda of the session explained the importance of the responsibilities in promoting human rights in all its aspects. Through its membership and activities in the Human Rights Council, Bahrain worked continuously to promote and protect the human rights, which was a priority of its interior and exterior policies. On the national level, the country had embarked on a reform programme, which had been designed to protect and promote human rights, the rule of law and to respect the fundamental freedoms. Special attention had been given to empowering women through the Supreme Council for Women by promoting their rights politically, economically and socially.
Bahrain’s eagerness to respect its commitments had led to its active membership in many international human rights conventions, the Minister said. Examples were the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women and the Convention against Torture among others. While promoting human rights policies, Bahrain cooperated with the different United Nations mechanisms on human rights, the High Commissioner for Human Rights and non-governmental organizations. The country confirmed the necessity to put an end to the violations of human rights around the world. The promotion and the respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms were very important to establish a world of peace, security, stability and rule of law. Bahrain assured its support to the Council and its activities in a spirit of objectivity, transparency, cooperation and dialogue to promote and protect human rights.
ANA TRISIC-BABIC, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina, said with the adoption of resolution 60/251, the international community had paid due respect to the fact that human rights formed one of the fundamental pillars of the UN system, together with security and development. The compromise represented a genuine effort to enhance the credibility and effectiveness of the multilateral human rights system. During the first year of the Council, the decisions that had been taken had provided appropriate elements for the continuation of the work, as well as for the protection of the credibility of the Council, addressing the situations on the ground and enhancing the protection of people in need. The Council had set the goal of an ambitious programme of work for its first year that was still not completed. There was no doubt that members were making great efforts in this process, with the aim of developing a strong and effective Human Rights Council, which would be able to fulfil its mandate in a responsible and effective way.
It was expected that the Council would be able to finalise soon the consideration of establishing and implementing a new system of Universal Periodic Review as a credible and effective mechanism which would improve the situation of those most in need of protection, and at the same time assist all States in their efforts to full implement their human rights obligations in a cooperative manner, and based on interactive dialogue. It was hoped that, through the work of the Council, effective coordination and the mainstreaming of human rights would be promoted throughout the United Nations system, bearing in mind the responsibilities in conformity with the purposes and principles, contained in the United Nations Charter, as well as principles based on multilateralism and mutual understanding.
ALEXANDER V. YAKOVENKO, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, said that the major component of the international regime of human rights observance had to be reliance on the principle of collectivity in decision-making and on dialogue and willingness to solve urgent humanitarian issues by joint efforts based on universally recognized human rights standards, taking into account social, economic, historical, cultural and religious specificities and traditions. That dialogue must involve all parties concerned. Therefore, Russia was definitely against the recent appeals to divide all States into "good" and "poor" in terms of their observance of human rights standards and to set those criteria as an additional basis for membership and even participation of States in the work of United Nations human rights institutions and mechanisms. Those proposals not only contradicted the purposes of developing constructive cooperation between States, but also undermined the basic provisions of the United Nations Charter.
In the modern world the number of phenomena which not only compromised the international regime for human rights promotion and protection but undermined its foundation, basic human rights principals and standards, had sharply increased. In particular, no one could deny that one of the most acute problems in that regard was ethnic discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, which continued to mutate and reshape into new ugly forms. During the past few years that phenomenon had become global indeed, affecting even those countries that regarded themselves as successful in terms of their observance of human rights. For that reason, Russia considered it inadmissible that some members of the international community preferred to keep silent and ignore the processes in their own neighbourhood that directly or indirectly contributed to the promotion of nationalist ideology. In Russia's view, recent developments were witness to the fact that some groups and political forces were trying to erase from people's memory the fundamental fact that the very birth of both the United Nations and the modern international system of promotion and protection of human rights was the result of the great victory of the Second World War over Nazi fascist ideology, based on the concept of racial superiority. The Russian Federation resolutely condemned any attempts to desecrate the memory of those who fought and gave their lives to refute that concept, which would only promote the spreading of ideas and manifestations of ethnic discrimination and xenophobia in the world.
IAN MCCARTNEY, Minister for International Human Rights of the United Kingdom, said the Council should be the guardian, beacon and groundbreaker for all human rights, everywhere. Its responsibility was unique: to support those nations striving to serve their citizens better; to foster dialogue on shared challenges, which could only have shared solutions; and to promote human rights throughout the United Nations. Human rights were by their very nature sensitive, difficult, and political. Fundamentally, however, the question was clear: human rights went to the very heart of the relationship between citizens and their Governments, and between Governments themselves. States’ commitment to uphold human rights at home, and their response to constructive suggestions to improve, would be seen as the measure of their individual standing in the global community. The Council was uniquely placed to address such issues: eight months after its work began, the abuse of human rights continued. The Council’s attention had been urgently needed, and the United Kingdom firmly supported the Council’s focus on the appalling situation in Darfur.
The Council could and should do better: it should do all it could, working with the Governments concerned wherever possible, to ensure greater respect in practice for the human rights that were discussed in theory within the United Nations. The respect was alarmingly lacking in some countries. The Council was the sum of its parts: its success rested squarely with its members, who had a particular responsibility for this unique institution. The Council was rightly seeking to build its actions on the bedrock of cooperation, and this was the surest foundation of better implementation of human rights. Problems could only be solved through understanding born of dialogue, openness and transparency. Fellow human beings should be at the core of all the work of the Council: this work could not be about politicised rhetoric. It could and should always be about real people and their struggle against injustice, conflict and abuse. The faceless millions who relied on the work of the Council on their behalf should be given a voice.
ALEXANDROS N. ZENON, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs of Cyprus, said that Cyprus fully subscribed to the statement delivered yesterday by the Minister of Foreign Affairs from Germany, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, on behalf of the European Union. The establishment of the Human Rights Council was a milestone in further strengthening the United Nations human rights machinery. The Council should continue promoting, in a sustained and result-oriented manner, a sincere dialogue and cooperation in human rights, divorced from political controversies and double standards. The Government of Cyprus considered the adoption of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance as a significant step forward in the promotion and protection of human rights and was pleased to have been among the first signatories. The country also welcomed the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Considerable progress had been achieved in abolishing the death penalty, which thus contributed to the enhancement of human dignity and the progressive codification of human rights law.
Cyprus, as a country whose priority lay in upholding the rule of law and the full respect for human rights, would like to see the Human Rights Council fulfil its mandate and lead to human rights improvements on the ground, the Vice Minister said. Although numerous resolutions and decisions had been adopted by international organizations and bodies on the ongoing violation on human rights in Cyprus in the past, they remained unimplemented so far. The people of Cyprus were thus still victims of violations of human rights, as for an example stated by the European Court of Human Rights in its judgment in the case Cyprus vs. Turkey. Any settlement of the Cyprus question must be based on international law, the relevant United Nations resolutions, European Union principles and the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. The Government of Cyprus affirmed its readiness to do its utmost for the resumption of meaningful negotiations for a just, viable and lasting settlement of the Cyrus question.
JOAO ALVES MONTEIRO, Vice Minister of Justice of Angola, said that the establishment of the Human Rights Council was one of the most important successes of the United Nations lately. Nevertheless, the balance of this first year of the Council demonstrated that the objectives that made the creation of this organ could be compromised because there was still the tendency to politicise its deliberations and decisions while using two heights and two measures. The human rights situation in the world had in general improved substantially. Africa had made important progresses in this domain with ending internal conflicts in some countries, democratising others and establishing consequently the political, economic, social and juridical conditions necessary to promote and protect human rights. Angola was no exception to that process, ending its internal conflict and allowing the Government to dedicate more attention to the rights of its citizens.
The commitment of the Angolan Government to promote and protect human rights was unconditional, the Vice Minister said. The country was confident that the consolidation of its democracy was strictly related with security, development and respect of human rights. Related to this, the Office of Human Rights had been created in 1997 as an organ to promote and protect human rights in the country. Other measures had been taken by the Angolan Government in order to enhance the observance of human rights, such as the improvement of the access of citizens to justice, the consecration of articles on the fundamental rights and obligations of citizens and the establishment of the Action Plan to the Juridical Protection of Children and the Juvenile Justice in 1988 among others. The Angolan institutions had proved to have mechanisms and guarantees to solve eventual violations of the rights and liberties of individuals or collectivities on its territory.
SID AHMED OULD EL BOU, Commissioner for Human Rights and the Fight Against Poverty of Mauritania, said proper presidential elections in an atmosphere of peace, freedom and transparency had recently taken place in Mauritania. The establishment of good governance and the foundations for democracy in collaboration with political partners and civil society had taken place there through numerous constitutional and political developments. Among these: improved representation of women, a National Committee for Human Rights, enhanced press freedoms, awareness raising and public training programmes on human rights, and judiciary reform. Political parties and civil society had been granted greater access to the media, environmental and consumer protection had been improved, and wealth distribution enhanced.
Mauritania was confident it would have the support of the international community and Human Rights Council in these improvements. However, the situation on the Middle East was a cause for concern. A just and comprehensive solution must be reached based on the principle of land for peace.
MATHIAS MEINRAD CHIKAWE, Deputy Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs of Tanzania, observed that poverty was both the cause and effect of gross inequality, abuse of democratic values, civil violence due to the struggle for resources, and the imposition of policies that only benefited the giver to the detriment of the receiver. It was despicable to advocate indivisibility, interdependence and universality of human rights while quite clearly some of their actions were propelling others to violate the human rights of innocent souls. It was also unbecoming for any country to preach human rights abroad while violating them at home. They had to do away with double standards, selectivity and politicisation of human rights for such an approach would only jeopardise the resolve to end impunity in the world. What was considered unacceptable to one country should not be treated differently in relation to others; else the principle of equality would become meaningless.
There had been encouraging gains in Tanzania in the protection and promotion of human rights, following the establishment of an independent Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance. Violence against women and children was another area of concern to the country, and the Government was taking positive steps to address gender-based violence. Tanzania was responding quite positively on issues of women’s empowerment and gender parity. Several laws were being considered for reform with the view of bringing them into conformity with international human rights standards, including a child law, laws on marriage, inheritance, succession, and on combating and preventing corruption. Tanzania was committed to the protection and promotion of human rights, and appealed to the Council to continue offering its support in the implementation of various plans and programmes pertaining to the promotion of human rights.
PHAM BINH MINH, Assistant Foreign Minister of Viet Nam, said it was a real milestone for the Human Rights Council to be established when the world community celebrated the sixtieth anniversary of the United Nations: this underscored the international commitment to construct an effective instrument to protect and promote human rights. The efforts of the UN system towards the universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, contributed to the stability and well being necessary for peaceful and friendly relations among nations, and to the improvement of the conditions for peace and security as well as the social and economic development of countries around the world. In this regard, the Council represented a great new opportunity to deal with new challenges in the area of human rights.
The Council had been going through its first year, taking difficult steps in its efforts to carry out the commitment to provide equal treatment to both civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights, the right to development, as well as the commitment not to allow confrontational approaches, exploitation of human rights for political purposes, selective targeting of individual countries for extraneous consideration, and double standards in the conduct of its work. However, there was concern that the trend of politicisation and confrontation had continued. The full realisation of human rights was the common goal of countries throughout the world, and an important goal for Viet Nam in its efforts to build a democratic and prosperous society.
ANDERS B JOHNSSON, Secretary-General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), said persistent violations of human rights around the world, some of them so commonplace that people may not recognise them as such, posed a huge challenge to the international community. Democracy should be based on acceptance, or better still respect, of the other. It should recognize difference and allow rather than suppress it. Democratic institutions existed to mediate tensions and maintain equilibrium between conflicting claims. Freedom of speech and expression were key to this exercise. The Council should draw inspiration from the highest standards of democracy and human rights, and look towards the guiding principles of democracy – transparency, accessibility, accountability and effectiveness – set out notably in a recent IPU publication “Parliament in the Twenty-First Century”.
Members of Parliament could do much to raise awareness of human rights and steer resources towards it. In this, the IPU had worked closely with national parliaments in the field of human rights, and parliaments and the IPU alike recognized the value of work carried out under the Council’s Special Procedures and the guidance provided by Special Rapporteurs on implementing human rights standards. These procedures should be continued. The Human Rights Council would do well to think outside the box and consider the parliamentary dimension of its work. Parliamentary input into the Universal Periodic Review mechanism should be encouraged. The huge pool of expertise and political will contained within the IPU and parliaments should also be harnessed to promote gender equality and combat human rights violations against women.
CARMEN MORENO, Director of the United Nations International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women (UN-INSTRAW), said women comprised just over 50 per cent of the world’s population, yet were far from 50 per cent in guaranteeing their basic education. Inequality in access to resources, salaries and services demonstrated the kind of structural discrimination women endured. While 48 per cent of migrants were women, and many contributed directly to the economies of their home countries by sending remittances home to their families, discrimination and violations of human rights remained among migrant women, and a perspective on human rights that acknowledged migrants’ rights was key to protecting human rights and attaining the Millennium Development Goals. Violence against women and girls, in the form of human trafficking and exploitation, remained and the international community should work to ensure that full rights to liberty, health and life without fear were safeguarded.
The prejudice and ignorance that were behind maltreatment, rape, violence and discrimination against women, even in their own homes, should be combated. There was no room for indifference, Ms. Moreno said. Capacity-building in development, security and human rights – the central pillars of UN-INSTRAW work – had been undertaken, and there had been numerous programmes orientated towards these areas, as well as in promoting the political participation of women at the local level. UN-INSTRAW offered the Council its cooperation in tackling the questions of women’s rights and freedoms and in strengthening gender equality in research and the development of directives and standards. Men and women alike should be free from ignorance, poverty, fear and persecution, and were entitled to fair access to work and equal human rights. UN-INSTRAW was certain that, together, in government and civil society, academia and business, they could achieve these aims.
_________
For use of the information media; not an official record
AFTERNOON
HRC/07/6
13 March 2007
Issues concerning the need for the strict implementation of the Human Rights Council’s decisions, the indivisibility, universality and interdependence of all human rights, and the building of the Council’s institutions were among those raised by a series of dignitaries speaking this afternoon in the high-level segment of the Council.
Jean-Marie Atangana Mebara, Minister of State at the Ministry for Foreign Relations of Cameroon, said the Human Rights Council was the forum in which all human rights abuses must be addressed. It was also the forum in which they were called upon, without leniency, to provide solutions to the various threats posed to human rights in the world. Cameroon also wished to recall that the right to development was an integral part of human rights, which was fundamental to ensuring the enjoyment of other rights.
Elmar Mammadyarov, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan, said at this formative stage, serious thought should be given to devising the necessary mechanisms to watchdog the strict implementation of the Council’s decisions. Unfortunately, the experience of the first nine months gave every reason to ponder seriously this aspect of the Council’s work.
Mohamed Ali Elmardi, Minister of Justice of Sudan, said that due to the non-participation of two of the five members of the high-level mission on Darfur, it was no longer valid and could therefore not be in a position to effectively and objectively discharge its mandate. Sudan therefore strongly and resolutely opposed any consideration by the Council of any report coming out of this mission.
Mehmet Aydin, Minister of State of Turkey, said the establishment of the new Human Rights Council was a milestone in the long journey of human freedom and security. The task of the Council was to make sure that the jurisprudence created was observed and respected, and to this end, the Council should be a society of the committed, and should reflect the universality of human rights.
Patrick A. Chinamasa, Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs of Zimbabwe, said in spite of machinations by some non-governmental organizations and international media organizations to undermine the Government of Zimbabwe, the country was firmly committed to human rights as shown by its accession to the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights. Negotiations were under way to set up a National Commission on Human Rights to complement the work of the Office of the Ombudsman and broader constitutional provisions.
Torki Bin Mohammed Bin Saud Al-Kabeer, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs of Saudi Arabia, said recent years had shown that the crises from which the international community was suffering were attributable to a lack of balanced human rights dialogue and the existence of irresponsible tendencies that were doing their utmost to exploit the present situation, with a view to the incitement of conflict, racial discrimination and discrimination based on religion or belief in order to further certain aims that were totally inconsistent with the principles of human rights. A judicious and careful approach should be adopted to overcome this crisis, with the minimum of detriment and losses, through tolerance, dialogue and rejection of discrimination in all its forms.
Nezar Albaharna, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Bahrain, said that through its membership and activities in the Human Rights Council, Bahrain worked continuously to promote and protect human rights, which were a priority of its interior and exterior policies. On the national level, the country had embarked on a reform programme, which had been designed to protect and promote human rights, the rule of law and to respect fundamental freedoms.
Ana Trisic-Babic, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina, said it was expected that the Council would be able to finalise soon the consideration of establishing and implementing a new system of Universal Periodic Review as a credible and effective mechanism which would improve the situation of those most in need of protection, and at the same time assist all States in their efforts to fully implement their human rights obligations in a cooperative manner, and based on interactive dialogue.
Alexander Yakovenko, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, said that no one could deny that one of the most acute problems was ethnic discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, which continued to mutate and reshape into new ugly forms. During the past few years that phenomenon had become global indeed, affecting even those countries that regarded themselves as successful in terms of their observance of human rights. For that reason, Russia considered it inadmissible that some members of the international community preferred to keep silent and ignore the processes in their own neighbourhood that directly or indirectly contributed to the promotion of nationalist ideology.
Ian Mccartny, Minister for International Human Rights of the United Kingdom, said eight months after the work of the Council had begun, the abuse of human rights continued. The Council’s attention had been urgently needed, and the United Kingdom firmly supported the Council’s focus on the appalling situation in Darfur. The Council could and should do better: it should do all it could, working with the Governments concerned wherever possible, to ensure greater respect in practice for the human rights that were discussed in theory within the United Nations. The respect was alarmingly lacking in some countries.
Alexandros N. Zenon, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs of Cyprus, said the establishment of the Human Rights Council was a milestone in further strengthening the United Nations human rights machinery. The Council should continue promoting, in a sustained and result-oriented manner, a sincere dialogue and cooperation in human rights, divorced from political controversies and double standards. Cyprus, as a country whose priority lay in upholding the rule of law and the full respect for human rights, would like to see the Human Rights Council fulfil its mandate and lead to human rights improvements on the ground.
Joao Alves Monteiro, Vice Minister of Justice of Angola, said that the establishment of the Human Rights Council was one of the most important successes of the United Nations lately. Nevertheless, the balance of this first year of the Council demonstrated that the objectives that made the creation of this organ could be compromised because there was still the tendency to politicise its deliberations and decisions while using two heights and two measures.
Sid Ahmed Ould El Bou, Commissioner for Human Rights and the Fight Against Poverty of Mauritania, said proper presidential elections in an atmosphere of peace, freedom and transparency had recently taken place in Mauritania. The establishment of good governance and the foundations for democracy in collaboration with political partners and civil society had taken place there through numerous constitutional and political developments. Mauritania was confident it would have the support of the international community and Human Rights Council in these improvements.
Mathias Meinrad Chikawe, Deputy Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs of Tanzania, said it was unbecoming for any country to preach human rights abroad while violating them at home. They had to do away with double standards, selectivity and politicisation of human rights for such an approach would only jeopardise the resolve to end impunity in the world. What was considered unacceptable to one country should not be treated differently in relation to others; else the principle of equality would become meaningless.
Pham Binh Minh, Assistant Foreign Minister of Viet Nam, said the Council had been going through its first year, taking difficult steps in its efforts to carry out the commitment to provide equal treatment to both civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights, the right to development, as well as the commitment not to allow confrontational approaches, exploitation of human rights for political purposes, selective targeting of individual countries for extraneous consideration, and double standards in the conduct of its work. However, there was concern that the trend of politicisation and confrontation had continued.
Anders B. Johnsson, Secretary-General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), said members of Parliament could do much to raise awareness of human rights and steer resources towards it. In this, the IPU had worked closely with national parliaments in the field of human rights, and parliaments and the IPU alike recognized the value of work carried out under the Council’s Special Procedures and the guidance provided by Special Rapporteurs on implementing human rights standards. These procedures should be continued.
Carmen Moreno, Director of the United Nations International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women, said inequality in access to resources, salaries and services demonstrated the kind of structural discrimination women endured. While 48 per cent of migrants were women, and many contributed directly to the economies of their home countries by sending remittances home to their families, discrimination and violations of human rights remained among migrant women, and a perspective on human rights that acknowledged migrants’ rights was key to protecting human rights and attaining the Millennium Development Goals.
The Council will resume its work at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 14 March to conclude its high-level segment.
Statements
JEAN-MARIE ATANGANA MEBARA, Minister of State at the Ministry for Foreign Relations of Cameroon, said that the profound changes that the United Nations had systematically and determinedly undertaken to reinforce international legal norms in the area of human rights constituted marked progress in upholding the great values of civilization. Cameroon wished here to express its profound satisfaction at the recent adoption and opening for signature of the International Convention against Forced Disappearances, which was a fitting tribute to those who had disappeared as well as their families, who would now benefit from the "right to know". That development was all the more welcome given that President Biya of Cameroon had made the promotion and protection of human rights one of the principal themes of his policy of modernization in the country when he came to power in 1982.
Unfortunately, the past year had been marred by events that had compromised the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the world, and several hotbeds continued including the Middle East, which remained a troubled zone; the fact that Iraq had not found that path to peace; and the numerous conflicts that continued to rage on the African continent, which gave rise to the loss of numerous lives and provoked the displacement of persons, despite interventions by the United Nations and the African Union. The Human Rights Council had not ceased to demonstrate its concern on those issues, as testified to by the different special sessions they had undertaken, and the solutions proposed, despite the mixed results with regard to their implementation. The Human Rights Council was the forum in which all human rights abuses must be addressed, and also the forum in which they were called upon, without leniency, to provide solutions to the various threats posed to human rights in the world. Cameroon also wished to recall that the right to development was an integral part of human rights, which was fundamental to ensuring the enjoyment of other rights. The international community had therefore more than ever to accord equal priority to the promotion of an adequate standard of living, and a healthy environment for the flowering of the well being of individuals.
ELMAR MAMMADYAROV, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan, said while talking about credibility, it should be realised that it started with safeguarding self-respect and that meant providing for strict scrutiny over the implementation of its own decisions, which should be seen as a sine qua non for its survival and which would ensure consistency and subsequent efficiency of the Human Rights Council. At this formative stage, serious thought should be given to devising the necessary mechanisms to watchdog the strict implementation of the Council’s decisions. Unfortunately, the experience of the first nine months gave every reason to ponder seriously this aspect of the Council’s work. The instrumental and important role of the Special Procedures in the field of protection and promotion of human rights was recognised, and the necessity of dialogue, the main purpose of which should be to identify existing problems and shortcomings, should be underlined, and they should be addressed in the spirit of understanding and cooperation.
The work on the Expert Advisory Body should lead to necessary improvements and rationalisation of its contextual and principled nature to better serve the purpose of further development of human rights standards. On the Universal Periodic Review, the major challenge lay in ensuring the workability of this innovation in practice. The mechanism in the core of which rested the principle of universality with regard to both rights and freedoms as well as all States required effective structuring. On the agenda and methods of work, there were merits in a broad but streamlined agenda that would have as its object all human rights without exception. Two core principles, namely objectivity and non-discrimination, should guide the work of the Council to enable it to effectively address real human rights concerns whenever and wherever they occurred. The Council should be in a position to address gross and systematic human rights violations, whenever and by whomever these were committed. It was absolutely clear that without genuine political will on all sides, the solemn declarations of last year on the fresh start and new spirit of the Council were going to remain mere words.
MOHAMED ALI ELMARDI, Minister of Justice of Sudan, said that Sudan always followed a policy of transparency and open door in addressing all the human rights issues in the country on the firm belief that only constructive dialogue and sincere cooperation promoted and protected human rights in the country. Within the context of commitment and cooperation, the Government of Sudan had extended its invitations to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan, other United Nations mandate holders and many international non-governmental organizations to visit the country and work there. It had accepted the decision of the Council to dispatch a high-level mission to assess the human rights situation in Darfur and the needs of Sudan in this regard in order to engage into constructive dialogue. Sudan noticed that although it was agreed that the nomination of the members of the assessment mission to Darfur should be consultative, no engagement had been done in this direction. No consideration was paid to Sudan’s legitimate and objective and reliable information reservations and concerns, especially with regard to the preconceived judgment about the situation in Darfur and false projections of genocide. Sudan denounced the double standards practiced by this particular mission.
Due to the non-participation of two of its five members, the mission was no longer valid and could therefore not be in a position to effectively and objectively discharge its mandate. Sudan therefore strongly and resolutely opposed any consideration by the Council of any report coming out of this mission. The Government of Sudan had repeatedly announced and emphasized its firm willingness to reach a just, lasting and comprehensive solution to all problems in the Sudan. The more recent core steps taken in Darfur were among others the Darfur Peace Agreement, whose implementation was rapidly on the march, a higher number of seats in the Executive and the Legislature allocated to representatives of the signatory movements, the voluntarily return of 100.000 internally displaced persons and refugees to their original villages in the three Darfur states, and the conclusion of 95 intertribal reconciliations. In addition, the humanitarian situation was much more stable now and there was a visible decrease in malnutrition and mortality rates. Huge sums of money had been allocated and delivered to the newly formed Darfur Authority for the purposes of development and services. Sudan would like to reiterate its willingness to cooperate sincerely and earnestly with all efforts that aimed at supporting its government to bring peace and stability in the country.
MEHMET AYDIN, Minister of State of Turkey, said the establishment of the new Human Rights Council was a milestone in the long journey of human freedom and security. With the Council, the cause of human rights had entered a new era. For much of the past 60 years, the focus had been on articulating, codifying and enshrining rights, and this was now giving way to an era of implementation. The task of the Council was to make sure that the jurisprudence created was observed and respected, and to this end, the Council should be a society of the committed, and should reflect the universality of human rights. However, the task was not easy, for the United Nations was a body that reflected many diverse constituencies, voicing many diverse priorities, needs and hopes. Democracy was becoming more and more fragile in the so-called Western countries as well as in other parts of the world, at a time when the new and restored democracies were looking for better and more successful examples.
In a functioning human rights regime, integration ought to start in the public sphere that was largely defined by fundamental freedoms and rights which were considered “universal” in some sense. No one had the right to ask others to leave their cultural values behind in the process of integration. Security was a must, but democracy, which was based on human rights, was not only a governance of good and peaceful days. Security measures should be taken not in spite of human rights or democratic spirit, but in accordance with them. Democratic rights and values faced another threat that should not be left unmentioned: this was the rising wave of culturalism, which expressed itself through manifold arguments which claimed monopoly over human rights and the values that underlay them.
PATRICK A CHINAMASA, Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs of Zimbabwe, reiterated the indivisibility, universality and interdependence of human rights, and called for a balance between civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development. In twenty years, little had been achieved in terms of the right to development as a result of strident and sterile debate. Zimbabwe called for an efficient and effective Universal Periodic Review system, and adequate follow up and cooperation among concerned States. The election of mandate holders should be the preferred approach, so as to engender a sense of ownership among Member States and remove cultural bias and misgivings, and a code of conduct should be established.
In spite of machinations by some non-governmental organizations and international media organizations to undermine the Government of Zimbabwe, the country was firmly committed to human rights as shown by its accession to the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights. Negotiations were under way to set up a National Commission on Human Rights, to complement the work of the Office of the Ombudsman and broader constitutional provisions. The success of the Human Rights Council depended on the willingness of Member States to operate within the strictures on international human rights and humanitarian law. There should be no opportunity for countries to place themselves above those laws, and “holier than thou” attitudes coming before the Council should be met with steadfast deafness.
TORKI BIN MOHAMMED BIN SAUD AL-KABEER, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs of Saudi Arabia, said the establishment of a strong Council with practical human rights mechanisms necessitated consideration of the facts of history and the requirements of logic. It was impossible to act without regard for the factors underlying the momentous events that were taking place in many regions of the world, including the Middle East, and which had given rise to erroneous concepts and ideas that were inconsistent with the values and principles in which the peoples of the region believed. These misconceptions should be confronted in order to prevent them from adversely affecting the work of the Council. Human development, economic prosperity and political stability constituted the fundamental requirements for a better future for mankind as a whole, and any endeavours made to this end would inevitably support, strengthen, enhance and help to safeguard human rights.
Recent years had shown that the crises from which the international community was suffering were attributable to a lack of balanced human rights dialogue and the existence of irresponsible tendencies that were doing their utmost to exploit the present situation, with a view to the incitement of conflict, racial discrimination and discrimination based on religion or belief in order to further certain aims that were totally inconsistent with the principles of human rights. A judicious and careful approach should be adopted to overcome this crisis, with the minimum of detriment and losses, through tolerance, dialogue and rejection of discrimination in all its forms. The question of the Council’s institution building should be accorded sufficient time and effort at this crucial stage by making it one of its working priorities in order to address the important questions requiring action by the Council, such as the issues of poverty, globalisation, the right to development, and matters of direct concern to individuals.
NEZAR ALBAHARNA, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Bahrain, said that the agenda of the session explained the importance of the responsibilities in promoting human rights in all its aspects. Through its membership and activities in the Human Rights Council, Bahrain worked continuously to promote and protect the human rights, which was a priority of its interior and exterior policies. On the national level, the country had embarked on a reform programme, which had been designed to protect and promote human rights, the rule of law and to respect the fundamental freedoms. Special attention had been given to empowering women through the Supreme Council for Women by promoting their rights politically, economically and socially.
Bahrain’s eagerness to respect its commitments had led to its active membership in many international human rights conventions, the Minister said. Examples were the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women and the Convention against Torture among others. While promoting human rights policies, Bahrain cooperated with the different United Nations mechanisms on human rights, the High Commissioner for Human Rights and non-governmental organizations. The country confirmed the necessity to put an end to the violations of human rights around the world. The promotion and the respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms were very important to establish a world of peace, security, stability and rule of law. Bahrain assured its support to the Council and its activities in a spirit of objectivity, transparency, cooperation and dialogue to promote and protect human rights.
ANA TRISIC-BABIC, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina, said with the adoption of resolution 60/251, the international community had paid due respect to the fact that human rights formed one of the fundamental pillars of the UN system, together with security and development. The compromise represented a genuine effort to enhance the credibility and effectiveness of the multilateral human rights system. During the first year of the Council, the decisions that had been taken had provided appropriate elements for the continuation of the work, as well as for the protection of the credibility of the Council, addressing the situations on the ground and enhancing the protection of people in need. The Council had set the goal of an ambitious programme of work for its first year that was still not completed. There was no doubt that members were making great efforts in this process, with the aim of developing a strong and effective Human Rights Council, which would be able to fulfil its mandate in a responsible and effective way.
It was expected that the Council would be able to finalise soon the consideration of establishing and implementing a new system of Universal Periodic Review as a credible and effective mechanism which would improve the situation of those most in need of protection, and at the same time assist all States in their efforts to full implement their human rights obligations in a cooperative manner, and based on interactive dialogue. It was hoped that, through the work of the Council, effective coordination and the mainstreaming of human rights would be promoted throughout the United Nations system, bearing in mind the responsibilities in conformity with the purposes and principles, contained in the United Nations Charter, as well as principles based on multilateralism and mutual understanding.
ALEXANDER V. YAKOVENKO, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, said that the major component of the international regime of human rights observance had to be reliance on the principle of collectivity in decision-making and on dialogue and willingness to solve urgent humanitarian issues by joint efforts based on universally recognized human rights standards, taking into account social, economic, historical, cultural and religious specificities and traditions. That dialogue must involve all parties concerned. Therefore, Russia was definitely against the recent appeals to divide all States into "good" and "poor" in terms of their observance of human rights standards and to set those criteria as an additional basis for membership and even participation of States in the work of United Nations human rights institutions and mechanisms. Those proposals not only contradicted the purposes of developing constructive cooperation between States, but also undermined the basic provisions of the United Nations Charter.
In the modern world the number of phenomena which not only compromised the international regime for human rights promotion and protection but undermined its foundation, basic human rights principals and standards, had sharply increased. In particular, no one could deny that one of the most acute problems in that regard was ethnic discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, which continued to mutate and reshape into new ugly forms. During the past few years that phenomenon had become global indeed, affecting even those countries that regarded themselves as successful in terms of their observance of human rights. For that reason, Russia considered it inadmissible that some members of the international community preferred to keep silent and ignore the processes in their own neighbourhood that directly or indirectly contributed to the promotion of nationalist ideology. In Russia's view, recent developments were witness to the fact that some groups and political forces were trying to erase from people's memory the fundamental fact that the very birth of both the United Nations and the modern international system of promotion and protection of human rights was the result of the great victory of the Second World War over Nazi fascist ideology, based on the concept of racial superiority. The Russian Federation resolutely condemned any attempts to desecrate the memory of those who fought and gave their lives to refute that concept, which would only promote the spreading of ideas and manifestations of ethnic discrimination and xenophobia in the world.
IAN MCCARTNEY, Minister for International Human Rights of the United Kingdom, said the Council should be the guardian, beacon and groundbreaker for all human rights, everywhere. Its responsibility was unique: to support those nations striving to serve their citizens better; to foster dialogue on shared challenges, which could only have shared solutions; and to promote human rights throughout the United Nations. Human rights were by their very nature sensitive, difficult, and political. Fundamentally, however, the question was clear: human rights went to the very heart of the relationship between citizens and their Governments, and between Governments themselves. States’ commitment to uphold human rights at home, and their response to constructive suggestions to improve, would be seen as the measure of their individual standing in the global community. The Council was uniquely placed to address such issues: eight months after its work began, the abuse of human rights continued. The Council’s attention had been urgently needed, and the United Kingdom firmly supported the Council’s focus on the appalling situation in Darfur.
The Council could and should do better: it should do all it could, working with the Governments concerned wherever possible, to ensure greater respect in practice for the human rights that were discussed in theory within the United Nations. The respect was alarmingly lacking in some countries. The Council was the sum of its parts: its success rested squarely with its members, who had a particular responsibility for this unique institution. The Council was rightly seeking to build its actions on the bedrock of cooperation, and this was the surest foundation of better implementation of human rights. Problems could only be solved through understanding born of dialogue, openness and transparency. Fellow human beings should be at the core of all the work of the Council: this work could not be about politicised rhetoric. It could and should always be about real people and their struggle against injustice, conflict and abuse. The faceless millions who relied on the work of the Council on their behalf should be given a voice.
ALEXANDROS N. ZENON, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs of Cyprus, said that Cyprus fully subscribed to the statement delivered yesterday by the Minister of Foreign Affairs from Germany, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, on behalf of the European Union. The establishment of the Human Rights Council was a milestone in further strengthening the United Nations human rights machinery. The Council should continue promoting, in a sustained and result-oriented manner, a sincere dialogue and cooperation in human rights, divorced from political controversies and double standards. The Government of Cyprus considered the adoption of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance as a significant step forward in the promotion and protection of human rights and was pleased to have been among the first signatories. The country also welcomed the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Considerable progress had been achieved in abolishing the death penalty, which thus contributed to the enhancement of human dignity and the progressive codification of human rights law.
Cyprus, as a country whose priority lay in upholding the rule of law and the full respect for human rights, would like to see the Human Rights Council fulfil its mandate and lead to human rights improvements on the ground, the Vice Minister said. Although numerous resolutions and decisions had been adopted by international organizations and bodies on the ongoing violation on human rights in Cyprus in the past, they remained unimplemented so far. The people of Cyprus were thus still victims of violations of human rights, as for an example stated by the European Court of Human Rights in its judgment in the case Cyprus vs. Turkey. Any settlement of the Cyprus question must be based on international law, the relevant United Nations resolutions, European Union principles and the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. The Government of Cyprus affirmed its readiness to do its utmost for the resumption of meaningful negotiations for a just, viable and lasting settlement of the Cyrus question.
JOAO ALVES MONTEIRO, Vice Minister of Justice of Angola, said that the establishment of the Human Rights Council was one of the most important successes of the United Nations lately. Nevertheless, the balance of this first year of the Council demonstrated that the objectives that made the creation of this organ could be compromised because there was still the tendency to politicise its deliberations and decisions while using two heights and two measures. The human rights situation in the world had in general improved substantially. Africa had made important progresses in this domain with ending internal conflicts in some countries, democratising others and establishing consequently the political, economic, social and juridical conditions necessary to promote and protect human rights. Angola was no exception to that process, ending its internal conflict and allowing the Government to dedicate more attention to the rights of its citizens.
The commitment of the Angolan Government to promote and protect human rights was unconditional, the Vice Minister said. The country was confident that the consolidation of its democracy was strictly related with security, development and respect of human rights. Related to this, the Office of Human Rights had been created in 1997 as an organ to promote and protect human rights in the country. Other measures had been taken by the Angolan Government in order to enhance the observance of human rights, such as the improvement of the access of citizens to justice, the consecration of articles on the fundamental rights and obligations of citizens and the establishment of the Action Plan to the Juridical Protection of Children and the Juvenile Justice in 1988 among others. The Angolan institutions had proved to have mechanisms and guarantees to solve eventual violations of the rights and liberties of individuals or collectivities on its territory.
SID AHMED OULD EL BOU, Commissioner for Human Rights and the Fight Against Poverty of Mauritania, said proper presidential elections in an atmosphere of peace, freedom and transparency had recently taken place in Mauritania. The establishment of good governance and the foundations for democracy in collaboration with political partners and civil society had taken place there through numerous constitutional and political developments. Among these: improved representation of women, a National Committee for Human Rights, enhanced press freedoms, awareness raising and public training programmes on human rights, and judiciary reform. Political parties and civil society had been granted greater access to the media, environmental and consumer protection had been improved, and wealth distribution enhanced.
Mauritania was confident it would have the support of the international community and Human Rights Council in these improvements. However, the situation on the Middle East was a cause for concern. A just and comprehensive solution must be reached based on the principle of land for peace.
MATHIAS MEINRAD CHIKAWE, Deputy Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs of Tanzania, observed that poverty was both the cause and effect of gross inequality, abuse of democratic values, civil violence due to the struggle for resources, and the imposition of policies that only benefited the giver to the detriment of the receiver. It was despicable to advocate indivisibility, interdependence and universality of human rights while quite clearly some of their actions were propelling others to violate the human rights of innocent souls. It was also unbecoming for any country to preach human rights abroad while violating them at home. They had to do away with double standards, selectivity and politicisation of human rights for such an approach would only jeopardise the resolve to end impunity in the world. What was considered unacceptable to one country should not be treated differently in relation to others; else the principle of equality would become meaningless.
There had been encouraging gains in Tanzania in the protection and promotion of human rights, following the establishment of an independent Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance. Violence against women and children was another area of concern to the country, and the Government was taking positive steps to address gender-based violence. Tanzania was responding quite positively on issues of women’s empowerment and gender parity. Several laws were being considered for reform with the view of bringing them into conformity with international human rights standards, including a child law, laws on marriage, inheritance, succession, and on combating and preventing corruption. Tanzania was committed to the protection and promotion of human rights, and appealed to the Council to continue offering its support in the implementation of various plans and programmes pertaining to the promotion of human rights.
PHAM BINH MINH, Assistant Foreign Minister of Viet Nam, said it was a real milestone for the Human Rights Council to be established when the world community celebrated the sixtieth anniversary of the United Nations: this underscored the international commitment to construct an effective instrument to protect and promote human rights. The efforts of the UN system towards the universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, contributed to the stability and well being necessary for peaceful and friendly relations among nations, and to the improvement of the conditions for peace and security as well as the social and economic development of countries around the world. In this regard, the Council represented a great new opportunity to deal with new challenges in the area of human rights.
The Council had been going through its first year, taking difficult steps in its efforts to carry out the commitment to provide equal treatment to both civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights, the right to development, as well as the commitment not to allow confrontational approaches, exploitation of human rights for political purposes, selective targeting of individual countries for extraneous consideration, and double standards in the conduct of its work. However, there was concern that the trend of politicisation and confrontation had continued. The full realisation of human rights was the common goal of countries throughout the world, and an important goal for Viet Nam in its efforts to build a democratic and prosperous society.
ANDERS B JOHNSSON, Secretary-General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), said persistent violations of human rights around the world, some of them so commonplace that people may not recognise them as such, posed a huge challenge to the international community. Democracy should be based on acceptance, or better still respect, of the other. It should recognize difference and allow rather than suppress it. Democratic institutions existed to mediate tensions and maintain equilibrium between conflicting claims. Freedom of speech and expression were key to this exercise. The Council should draw inspiration from the highest standards of democracy and human rights, and look towards the guiding principles of democracy – transparency, accessibility, accountability and effectiveness – set out notably in a recent IPU publication “Parliament in the Twenty-First Century”.
Members of Parliament could do much to raise awareness of human rights and steer resources towards it. In this, the IPU had worked closely with national parliaments in the field of human rights, and parliaments and the IPU alike recognized the value of work carried out under the Council’s Special Procedures and the guidance provided by Special Rapporteurs on implementing human rights standards. These procedures should be continued. The Human Rights Council would do well to think outside the box and consider the parliamentary dimension of its work. Parliamentary input into the Universal Periodic Review mechanism should be encouraged. The huge pool of expertise and political will contained within the IPU and parliaments should also be harnessed to promote gender equality and combat human rights violations against women.
CARMEN MORENO, Director of the United Nations International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women (UN-INSTRAW), said women comprised just over 50 per cent of the world’s population, yet were far from 50 per cent in guaranteeing their basic education. Inequality in access to resources, salaries and services demonstrated the kind of structural discrimination women endured. While 48 per cent of migrants were women, and many contributed directly to the economies of their home countries by sending remittances home to their families, discrimination and violations of human rights remained among migrant women, and a perspective on human rights that acknowledged migrants’ rights was key to protecting human rights and attaining the Millennium Development Goals. Violence against women and girls, in the form of human trafficking and exploitation, remained and the international community should work to ensure that full rights to liberty, health and life without fear were safeguarded.
The prejudice and ignorance that were behind maltreatment, rape, violence and discrimination against women, even in their own homes, should be combated. There was no room for indifference, Ms. Moreno said. Capacity-building in development, security and human rights – the central pillars of UN-INSTRAW work – had been undertaken, and there had been numerous programmes orientated towards these areas, as well as in promoting the political participation of women at the local level. UN-INSTRAW offered the Council its cooperation in tackling the questions of women’s rights and freedoms and in strengthening gender equality in research and the development of directives and standards. Men and women alike should be free from ignorance, poverty, fear and persecution, and were entitled to fair access to work and equal human rights. UN-INSTRAW was certain that, together, in government and civil society, academia and business, they could achieve these aims.
_________
For use of the information media; not an official record