SUB-COMMISSION CONSIDERS HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES SUCH AS TERRORISM, WOMEN AND HUMAN RIGHTS, AND SLAVERY

Sub-Commission on the Promotion
and Protection of Human Rights
54th session
13 August 2002
Morning


Debate on the Prevention of Discrimination,
Racism and Xenophobia Concluded


The Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights considered specific human rights issues this morning, with particular focus on terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. Other issues to be taken up under this agenda item include women and human rights, and contemporary forms of slavery.
Also this morning the Sub-Commission concluded its debate on the prevention of discrimination during which it addressed the promotion and protection of the human rights of minorities and indigenous peoples.
Kalliopi K.Koufa, Sub-Commission Expert and the Special Rapporteur on terrorism and human rights, presented a report on the subject and said that the events of 11 September had shocked people across the world and had greatly affected the climate of her investigations. The fight against terrorism had become a global priority. Anti-terrorism laws had been adopted and many of these measures were a subject of concern in terms of their effect on human rights. This had been the cause of consternation for the highest officials of the United Nations System.
Responding to her presentation, Expert Fisseha Yimer said the 11 September attacks had transformed the international landscape. Ms. Koufa had said that some States seemed to feel that the abrogation of human rights was necessary to combat terrorism. Had this really been expressed openly, he asked.
Sub-Commission Expert Halima Embarek Warzazi stressed the need for the United Nations to reach a definition of "terrorism" so that a unified response could be developed. What was certain was that "terrorism" must not be seen as synonymous to "Islam", she stressed , expressing her concern about the climate of racism and prejudice against Muslims across the world.
Chen Shiqiu, Expert, said terrorism was a common threat and a common enemy of human kind and must be fought by the collective will of human kind. However, hypocrisy and double standards must be avoided, as well as ideological politicisation. The elimination of terrorism must be taken as a point of departure with the respect for human rights being the goal - one could not counter violence with violence.
This morning, Y.K.J Sik Yuen, former Sub-Commission Expert, also responded to comments made today and yesterday on his working paper on human rights and weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Sik Yuen stressed that human rights were an important facet of the working paper. The punishment of countries using weapons of mass destruction could play an important part in future work.
Experts Miguel Alfonso Martinez, Francoise Jane Hampson, El Hadji Guisse, Soo Gil Park and Asbjorn Eide participated in the debate on other human rights issues.
Also speaking this morning were representatives of the following non-governmental organizations: Pax Romana, the International Institute for Peace; and the Movement Against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples. A representative of the World Bank also addressed the Sub-Commission.
Representatives of Azerbaijan, Sri Lanka, Chile, Yugoslavia, China, India and Iraq spoke this morning and representatives of Viet Nam, Pakistan, Armenia and Azerbaijan exercised their right of reply.
The Sub-Commission will reconvene at 3 p.m. to continue its consideration of other human right issues.

Statements on the Prevention of Discrimination
RIMA KOHIL, of Pax Romana, said there had been a deterioration in the situation of non-citizens since the terrorist attacks of 11 September, especially in the United States, where thousands of men from Arab countries along with American citizens of Arab descent were detained for questioning in a secret process. Some were charged with crimes, a number were released, others were deported for minor visa application errors, and fewer than 200 still remained in custody. Non-citizens could face military tribunals, and could face capital punishment if convicted -- situations not applied to citizens in reaction to the 11 September attacks.
Pax Romana also was concerned about the situation of non-citizens in Burma, Bangladesh, and India, and called upon the relevant Special Rapporteur to address circumstances in Asian countries. It was concerned over discrimination against religious minorities, and urged the Working Group on minorities to investigate the situation of religious minorities in greater detail, perhaps by drafting guidelines for States on this issue. It hoped for greater elaboration of the situation of affirmative action programmes carried out by non-State parties, and greater examination of discrimination based on work. It strongly supported continued reflection and discussion of recognition and reparations for human rights violations during the period of slavery and the slave trade, and called upon the Sub-Commission to address the link between the World Conference against Racism and the upcoming World Summit on Sustainable Development.
TATIANA SHANMIAN, of the International Institute for Peace, said discrimination against minorities continued in many parts of the world. No steps had been taken by the Government of Kenya to recognize the existence of minorities in the Constitution, in Iraq there were no state measures to protect non-Arab minorities, the conflict in Sudan exacerbated the atrocities committed against minorities, and the rights of ownership of the Baluch people of Pakistan were being denied. This list of violations of human rights of minorities could be added to by several other examples across the world. In this connection, the Institute reminded the Sub-Commission that the United Nations Security Council Resolution of 1948 about the plebiscite in Kashmir was still a point of the serious disagreement between India and Pakistan. The results of any plebiscite would depend on the opinion of the majority of the Kashmir population, which meant Muslims of the Kashmir Valley and Jammu, and any decision based on the results of the plebiscite could mean the violation of the human rights of other minorities. Therefore it seemed that the idea of a plebiscite as a way to settle the problem of Kashmir could lead up to the violation of human rights of minorities.
JEAN JACQUES KIRKYACHARIAN, of the Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples, said it was necessary to determine how to implement the recommendations of the World Conference against Racism. Political authorities had been very busy over the past few months, but now they should find time for studying and adapting the relevant Durban Declaration, and establishing measures to carry it out that would include all sectors of society; they should be persistent and dedicated -- he had to say he distrusted politicians. There should be efforts that had effect -- too often, committees without much power dealt with such matters.
Steps taken to date clearly had not abolished racism or changed racist attitudes. Without political will, the outcome of the World Conference would come to nothing. It was urgent to have a serious political commitment, rather than a sentimental commitment; it had to be understood that racism not only hurt people but undermined democracy. Some urgent problems needed immediate action, including protection of the rights of migrant workers and their families, including Gypsies, and protection of those seeking asylum. The Sub-Commission should establish a working group to craft solutions to the difficulties being encountered by these groups of vulnerable people.
ALFREDO SFEIR-YOUNIS, of the World Bank, addressed the Sub-Commission on the protection of minority rights. There were some fundamental hypotheses, he said. The first was that the protection of and respect for indigenous peoples and minority rights was not only for their benefit but also for the realization of those rights to the benefit of all on the planet. The second was that it was essential today to focus on the realization of those rights. Rights that were not realized were simply fake rights. It was essential to go far beyond debates and move into the implementation, processes and practices of human rights for everywhere and for everyone. Economics and economic development were fundamental to the implementation and realization of human rights of all sorts. Any realization of rights must be accompanied by major improvements in human welfare and significant prosperity particularly for the poorest of the poor. The third hypothesis was that protection of rights of minorities demanded acting on many fronts which went far beyond laws, rules and regulations, and ever far beyond economics and finance. The political economy of human rights and the many non-material dimensions of human existence were of fundamental importance.
MURAD NAJAFOV (Azerbaijan) said the country was a multi-national one; along with the majority Azerbaijanis, other ethnic minorities lived in peace. But minorities had the obligation to respect national legislation and the rights of others, and unfortunately the separatist movement in the Nagorno-Karabakh region had caused harsh violations of majority rights and with the help of a neighbouring country had expelled one-eighth of the country's population from their homes. This aggression was part of a long plan to remove Azerbaijanis from that region, and despite four Security Council resolutions Azerbaijan today was alone in confronting this puppet-terrorist formation, while hundreds of thousands of citizens lived in tent camps.
The Sub-Commission should pay more attention to such important issues as the using of minorities for the goal of the violation of the territorial integrity of States, and the duties of minorities to society at large, the respect of which was necessary for the prevention of discrimination and the protection of minorities.
PRASAD KARIYAWASAM (Sri Lanka) said that an over-whelming majority of countries today were multi-ethnic and multi-cultural. Minority issues, therefore, were as important as any other aspect of human rights and required continuing attention in all relevant United Nations fora. The situations of minorities often contributed towards violent internal conflicts in countries, the world over. Underlying grievances were based on mostly economic, social and cultural phenomena rooted in the midst of history and sometimes legend. It was therefore important to guard against racism, intolerant chauvinism and sectarianism. These tendencies, if left unattended, could easily de-generate into violence and terrorism. More work was therefore needed for standard setting and their implementation for the benefit of all minority communities irrespective of whether they were ethnic, religious or linguistic. Sri Lanka therefore considered the work of the Working Group on minorities as a very useful tool in addressing the issues relevant to minority communities.
The comments made by independent experts of this Sub-Commission on the on-going peace process were appreciated. The Government was at present making every endeavour to obtain a peaceful solution to the grievances of all minorities in Sir Lanka so that all communities in the country would be able to fulfil their aspirations in a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural setting. In this regard democracy, pluralism and respect for human rights were corner stones for resolution of conflicts involving minorities, be they in Sri Lanka or elsewhere.
PATRICIO UTRERAS (Chile) said the country had given great political importance to the outcome of the Durban World Conference against Racism. In the end, the Conference had been a great success and had contributed to the great process of the universalization of human rights. Chile had stated its determination to meet the commitments made in Durban. The outcome of the Conference was a point of departure for a process that should involve the entire international community, along with national Governments and private organizations. Effective efforts were needed.
Indigenous peoples, those of African descent, migrants, refugees, Roma, Sinti, HIV/AIDS sufferers -- all were entrapped in patterns of discrimination; other sufferers had yet to be identified. The battle against racism should not be delayed. States were called on to develop national action plans to implement the Durban Declaration, and guidance from the Sub-Commission on how to fashion these strategies would be useful. The challenge facing the world was a stiff one; strong commitment was needed, and now.
MILORAD SCEPANOVIC (Yugoslavia) shared with the Sub-Commission new information with regard to progress made in the implementation of new legislative provisions that were to regulate issues concerning freedoms and rights of national minorities. A law had been adopted in February of this year marking a turning point and a firm step forward towards a complete departure from a policy of discrimination, lack of confidence and intolerance in this sensitive area that had been conducted for the past decade by the former regime in the Former Republic of Yugoslavia and that had brought about a series of irrational, tragic and bloody conflicts in the region. An intensive activity was being undertaken for full implementation of provisions set forth by the law. Thus, a Code on the election of national councils had recently been adopted and a procedure was underway for the establishment of these bodies that provided for a cultural autonomy of minorities and advisory function of the Federal Government with regard to all issues on this matter.
Furthermore, in cooperation with the Ministry of Education of Serbia, the Federal Ministry of National and Ethnic Communities had set up an expert group on education entrusted to work on the reform of education in languages of minorities. Yugoslavia stood ready to give the Sub-Commission every assurance of its cooperation with all United Nations bodies in the area of minorities.
SHA ZUKANG (China) said his country felt all Governments should adopt practical measures to protect the rights of minorities by linking international human rights protections with the specific situations of each country. China had many minorities, and it was committed to promoting their rights and interests, to giving them complete equality, and to allowing them regional autonomy. It had established a goal that all ethnic groups should be represented in the National People's Congress. The situation of regional ethnic autonomy applied to regions where minorities were closely concentrated, including Tibet.
Tibetans had abandoned feudal serfdom and had become masters of their destiny. In recent years, a few separatists, supported by foreign powers, had cooked up stories about violations of human rights in Tibet, but they had underestimated the dedication of all Chinese, including Tibetans, to the unification of the country. Economic disparities between the prosperous coastal regions and the interior of the country had led to extensive national strategies to promote economic development in central and western regions, where many minorities lived. Sustained economic growth had resulted.
DEBABRATA SAHA (India) said the presence of minority groups had been a defining feature of India for several centuries. India had been a beacon to those seeking to propagate their ideas and wisdom. India was a multi-cultural and multi-religious country. The Constitution of India therefore provided special safeguards for minority rights, it prohibited all forms of discrimination and guaranteed equality of opportunity to everyone in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. It granted everyone the right freely to profess, practise and propagate all religions. Every religious denomination enjoyed the right to establish and maintain institutions for religious, educational and charitable purposes, and to manage its own affairs.
Despite a long history of tolerance, incidents involving violence resulting from religious intolerance did sometimes occur, in some cases engineered by outside forces inimical to India's secular fabric. The Government had always condemned these incidents unequivocally, and had taken prompt action to bring such incidents under check - and the guilty to book. The Indian delegation had been disappointed to hear certain critical references by one Sub-Commission Expert concerning the incidents in Gujarat, India. What happened in Gujarat was a shameful blot on the secular fabric of India. It was a huge travesty of the truth to say that no action had been taken against the guilty.
ABDUL KARIM ASWAD (Iraq) said the Durban Declaration of the World Conference against Racism, and its Programme of Action, indicated great aspirations, but the responses to the 11 September attacks had shown how far there was to go, as Arabs and Muslims had been victims of discriminatory legislation, discriminatory court proceedings, especially in Western countries, and had been subject to attacks, and unfairly linked with lawlessness and terrorism. Iraq had effective legislation prohibiting discrimination, and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination, in considering Iraq's latest report, had had positive things to say about Iraq's implementation of the relevant Convention.
The Committee also had noted the difficulties Iraq faced because of the aggression against the country, the economic embargo, which had caused some 1.6 million deaths, and the enforced partition of the north of the country. These acts, it had to be said, were extremely discriminatory. The embargo and this discrimination had to be ended.

Rights of Reply
A Representative of Viet Nam, exercising her right of reply, said that the work of the Sub-Commission must not be abused by fabrications such as that made by the non-governmental organization Transnational Radical Party. The statement of the non-governmental organization had been in clear contradiction to activities undertaken and promoted by the Government of Viet Nam.
A Representative of Pakistan, speaking in right of reply, said Pakistan wanted to respond to statements made by several non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and some disgruntled people who had their own agendas before the Sub-Commission. Christians made up a small minority of the population of Pakistan; they were fully equal in law and society, they participated fully in national life, and they practised their religion in peace and without discrimination. The recent violence referred to had been carried out by a small, extremist minority; the Government had condemned these dastardly and cowardly attacks against Christians. Those responsible were being pursued and would be captured and punished, and great steps were being taken to better protect the Christian community. Pakistan had great doubts about the credibility of Indian NGOs who criticized Pakistan and who expressed great concern about the situation in Pakistan but no concern about atrocities being committed against minorities in their own country.
A Representative of Armenia, exercising his right of reply, said he regretted the continuous attempts to use cheap propaganda against Armenia, a simplistic fabrication of facts in attempt to divide society. This forum was not meant for such arguments, however, otherwise he would have been perfectly willing to bring forward the exact facts of the situation in Nagorny Karabach. Finally, he regretted to conclude that the delegate of Azerbaijan had clearly not been informed of the on-going peace process between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the impending meeting of their respective heads of States.
A Representative of Azerbaijan, speaking in right of reply, said the delegation was most surprised when there was an authorization for Armenia to continue speaking when Azerbaijan was specifically mentioned, when in his own statement he had not mentioned another country. He thought it was a violation of rules to speak about other countries during statements.

Other Human Rights Issues
Under this agenda item, the Sub-Commission has before it a report by Kalliopi K. Koufa, Special Rapporteur on terrorism and human rights (E. CN.4/Sub.2/2002/35) which contains a review of recent terrorist activity relevant to the study. There is an update on the main activities and initiatives undertaken at the global level and an update on the main activities and initiatives undertaken by regional and other intergovernmental organizations such as the European Union, the Council of Europe, the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the Organization of American States. The report also contains a review of relevant comments, observations and decisions adopted by international human rights bodies and mechanisms. The report states that the appalling events of 11 September have introduced new and unprecedented dimensions to the legal issues and analysis, also to world events that feed interest in the topic more than ever. There still exists a "close-to-panic" reaction in much of the political and legal activity relating to terrorism and, of course equally importantly, on the part of many of the world's people. The report warns that "close-to-panic" reactions may have serious implications for international and human rights law, as well as humanitarian law. It report states that addressing the root causes of terrorism has also become a rather contentious area, with a number of States and scholars insisting that, as there is no justification for terrorism, there should be no effort made to try to understand its root causes. The Special Rapporteur recommends to the Sub-Commission to entrust her with the preparation of an additional progress report. With more time to study and reflect upon the recent catastrophic events, she believed that she could more usefully contribute to the topic.
There is also a report by the Secretary-General on the implementation of the Programme of Action for the Elimination of the Exploitation of Child Labour (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/2). The report states that the Commission on Human Rights, in adopting the Programme of Action, recommended that all States should adopt, as a matter of priority, the necessary legislative and administrative measures to implement the Programme of Action at the national and international levels, and requested the Sub-Commission to submit to it every two years a progress report on the implementation of the Programme of Action by all States. In resolution 2001/14 the Sub-Commission requested the Secretary-General to inform the Working Group on contemporary forms of slavery of measures adopted and to submit a report thereon to the Sub-Commission at its fifty-fourth session. The Secretary-General had sent notes verbale to Governments requesting the desired information. As of May 2002, replies had been received from Cyprus, Guatemala and Germany. The replies are included in the report.
There is a report by the Secretary-General on the situation of women and girls in the territories occupied by Afghan armed groups (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/27). The report explains that at its fifty-eight session the Commission on Human Rights adopted a resolution on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan, in which it noted recent abuses and violations of the human rights of women and girls, including rape and other forms of sexual violence, abductions, kidnappings, as well as forced marriage and trafficking. It called on the Interim Authorities and its successors to give high priority to the ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. The Commission also decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan for a further year. The present report of the Secretary-General accounts for recent developments in Afghanistan, including women's political participation and leadership; protection and security concerns; and mechanisms for the promotion and protection of women's rights. Among the several recommendations, the report states, amongst other things, that the Afghan Transitional Authority and all Afghan groups must respect fully all human rights and fundamental freedoms without discrimination of any kind, including gender; that the Ministry of Women's Affairs must be supported to continue its work towards restoring and improving the legal, economic, political and social status of women and girls throughout Afghanistan; the Government must ensure that each programme secretariat within the ministries had a gender component; that explicit gender components, including ones that address issues of sexual exploitation and violence, must be integrated into all programmes of humanitarian assistance; and that the Government should take the lead and ensure that traditional practices and rituals in the community which violate women's rights are eliminated.
There is report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on systematic rape, sexual slavery and slavery-like practices during armed conflicts (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002.28) The present report refers to new developments in the field of the activities of human rights mechanisms and of international and humanitarian law on these issues. The report consists of sections on the steps taken by human rights treaty bodies; steps taken by human rights mechanisms and procedures; steps taken by the Commission on Human Rights; and a section on the International Criminal Court, the International Criminal Tribunals and international humanitarian law. The report concludes that the use of sexual slavery in any form during times of armed conflict - rape camps, "comfort stations", or other forms of sexual abuse - constitutes a grave breach of international human rights and humanitarian law. Armed conflict, including occupation of territories, tended to result in increased sexual violence, in particular against women. The report states that specific protective and punitive measures are required. The report states that conventional and extra-conventional human rights mechanisms must continue and strengthen their consideration of all gender-based violations of human rights. The international community must be encouraged to provide systematically all relevant information on the issue. To end impunity for acts of sexual violence and sexual slavery during armed conflict, political will and concerted action on the part of the international community, Governments and non-governmental actors is required.
There is a note by the Secretariat (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/29) on other issues which reviews developments between 1 June 2001 and 1 June 2002 in fields with which the Sub-Commission has been previously concerned. These fields include the following covenants and conventions: International Covenant on Human Rights; International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; Convention on the Rights of the Child; International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families; and the effective implementation of instruments on human rights, including reporting obligations of States parties to the United Nations instruments in the field of human rights.
There is a document submitted by the World Health Organization (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/44) which concerns its activities and initiatives of relevance to the agenda of the Sub-Commission. The document particularly addresses economic, social and cultural rights; prevention of discrimination and specific human rights issues. All issues contained in the document are to do with human rights and health. Some of the issues contained in the report refer to the right to health; human rights and extreme poverty; the right to water; prevention of racism and discrimination; women and human rights; traditional practices affecting the health of women and the girl child; contemporary forms of slavery; and biotechnics.

Statements on Other Human Rights Issues
MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ, Sub-Commission Expert, said the report presented yesterday on human rights and weapons of mass destruction was very interesting and reflected considerable technical expertise by the author. Both human rights law and international humanitarian law were applicable to this subject. The technical merit of the paper and the identification of the different weapons were extremely useful. The future of the work, an initiative on the up-dating of this work, needed to include further specification concerning the mandate. This would allow the channelling of efforts on this most important work.
FRANCOISE JANE HAMPSON, Sub-Commission Expert, said the report on weapons of mass destruction or of indiscriminate effect was a credit-worthy attempt to cope with an impossible task; Mr. Sik Yuen had to familiarize himself with a series of different weapons and with a wide range of possible circumstances of their use. A framework of analysis might already exist -- the prohibition of arbitrary killing, and the prohibition of cruel and inhuman treatment. She was disappointed there had been no reference to genetic weapons. Some weapons were intrinsically indiscriminate, such as nuclear weapons. There also were weapons that had the potential to be indiscriminate -- a prime case was anti-personnel landmines. Then there was the disproportionate use of weapons directed against a military objective so that many civilians were affected. There also were weapons that had indiscriminate effects over time. The framework of laws on arbitrary killing and cruel and inhuman treatment perhaps could be applied to these different categories of weapons and/or use.
She felt the best approach to continuing investigation was a more restrictive legal approach, based on human rights law and international humanitarian law, which might actually have some chance of influencing the thinking of certain Governments and armed forces. What was needed was a further working paper, building on the technical and technological information contained in Mr. Sik Yuen's paper and providing a legal analysis based on human rights law, and taking into account humanitarian law.
Y. K. J. YEUNG SIK YUEN, Former Sub-Commission Expert, thanked the Sub-Commission for the many valuable comments on his working paper on human rights and weapons of mass destruction. Concerning the insufficient analysis of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Mr. Sik Yuen stressed that it was after all a working paper and that there were new length restrictions. However, the Non-Proliferation Treaty had been addressed in the paper. Concerning the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty, Mr, Sik Yuen agreed that more attention could have been paid to its provisions. With regard to the International Court of Justice, Mr. Sik Yuen said he maintained his opinion.
Mr. Sik Yuen agreed that human rights were an important facet of the working paper. Concerning the responsibility of countries engaged in the dealings of weapons of mass destruction and eventual punishment and restitution, these were crucial issues and could be included in the future work on the matter. On pollution risks occurring in the manufacture and use of nuclear weapons, Mr. Sik Yuen said that this had been included in the working paper. Mr. Park had made a valuable contribution yesterday concerning the validity of nuclear deterrence during the Cold War. There were in fact wars in the periphery and efforts were made to stay ahead in the arms race. Deterrence was only credible through strategic efforts and the actual build-up of weapons. The idea of deterrence only applied in situations when countries had equal force, and the attack by one would trigger the response of the other. The clash of such countries could be catastrophic. Real safety lay in the abstinence of making and using such weapons, not in deterrence. Conventions only covered the prevention of stockpiling of nuclear weapons, but there were no provisions on the total prevention of the use of nuclear weapons.
KALLIOPI K. KOUFA, Sub-Commission Expert and Special Rapporteur on terrorism and human rights, presenting her second progress report (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/35), said the events of 11 September, which had occurred, of course, since she presented her first progress report, had shocked and stunned people around the world and had greatly affected the climate of her investigations. Although intellectually one might have foreseen catastrophic events of this magnitude, no one in fact was able to predict the enormous emotional, psychological and other effects they would have on the global community and on international law. There was now everywhere a heated debate and a feeling of increasing urgency regarding most of the issues concerning terrorism and human rights, and no aspect of the efforts undertaken by the Sub-Commission in this area had been left untouched.
There were two new developments that could not be ignored: the first was that after 11 September, the fight against terrorism had become one of the priorities of all intergovernmental systems, as well as for a number of countries; in fact it had turned into a major subject of debate in various intergovernmental fora, and significant legislative and other measures and decisions had been taken. The second development was that a number of these initiatives and measures had already been the subject of concern in terms of their effects on human rights, and had even been the cause of consternation for the highest officials of the United Nations system. The Secretary-General, for example, had pleaded for States to uphold all human rights, saying that was the best way to prevent terrorism.
She had committed much of her report to reviewing the main anti-terrorism initiatives and activities undertaken since 11 September, Ms. Koufa said. The theme that arose repeatedly was that of how to reach the much-sought-after balance between the often conflicting imperatives of securing democratic society and of safeguarding civil liberties and human rights. The recent terrorist attacks had made her mandate gain importance and also in hardship, as there was today a shifting and unstable environment related to laws and reactions relating to terrorism. She recommended that the Sub-Commission authorize the preparation of an additional progress report.
FISSEHA YIMER, Sub-Commission Expert, said the difference between this year's report and that of last year was 11 September. Now, it was a post-11 September report. It had been emphasized that these tragic events had impacted her investigations. This date had transformed the international landscape. Those who might have been skeptical for the need of a report on terrorism must have changed their minds, he stressed. In the concluding observation a "close-to-panic" reaction had been mentioned, what did this mean exactly? Clarification was also needed on her expression of frustration of the deterioration of the international debate and the abandonment of long-held views of scholars. She had stated that some States seemed to feel that abrogation of human rights was necessary to combat terrorism. Had this really been expressed openly? There clearly was a sense of frustration on her part, but she must not despair, since the events of 11 September had added value to her work. She must continue her work on this topic and press on with this important subject.
HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Sub-Commission Expert, said the report showed Ms Koufa's integrity and competence. A definition of terrorism had always been difficult, and the problem of a definition had not been resolved. Also worrisomely, negotiations in New York on terrorism had largely left out human rights issues. It was necessary for the Sub-Commission to lament this serious oversight. There could be no justification for acts of terrorism, but the international community did need an overview of the root causes of terrorism. It was clear that the reactions to the 11 September attacks could have serious consequences for international law and international human rights law. The Special Rapporteur should be given as much time as possible to study these new developments.
It was to be hoped that a definition of terrorism could be reached by the United Nations so that a unified reaction to the threat it posed could be developed. Terrorism was not the result of Islam; Islam, with its 1.2 billion believers, taught that life was sacred; terrorist acts were committed by a small minority. And of course religious terrorism occurred under other religions, a prime case being in Northern Ireland. And in addition to religious terrorism, there was political terrorism, ideological terrorism, left- and right-wing terrorism. Lately, some people seemed to think that terrorism was only committed by Muslims. Hatred and violence had been spread against Muslims by some authors, and the Hollywood studios and the mass media were constantly stigmatizing the image of Muslims, branding Muslims as drug dealers, degenerates, terrorists, and other unsavoury things. It was clear that racism could indeed reach dangerous levels in Western countries.
The word "terrorism" had been used against Nelson Mandela and other freedom fighters; it had been used against Palestinians struggling for their right to self-determination. Policies based blatantly on geo-political ambitions and interests would only increase discrimination and lead more people to the intense desperation that bred terrorism. Of course nothing excused violent acts that killed utterly innocent women and children, but one absolutely had to look at the root causes -- that was certainly true in Palestine. Until the reasons for the suicide attacks there could be uprooted, there was little possibility the attacks could be controlled. And meanwhile the highest Palestinian authorities consistently condemned these attacks, and a leading Muslim religious authority in Palestine had said no one who carried out such a suicide attack could be considered a martyr. It was absolutely essential for the world to focus on the root causes of terrorism.
CHEN SHIQIU, Sub-Commission Expert, said the report had failed to reflect on possible solutions to the new situation faced by the international community. This must be the focus of the next phase of the study. Terrorism was a common threat and a common enemy of human kind and must be fought by the collective will of human kind. It was therefore necessary to allow the Security Council to play its role. Terrorist groups were increasingly cooperating with each other and cooperation was needed among the international community to fight them. However, hypocrisy and double standards must be avoided, as well as ideological politicisation. The elimination of terrorism must be taken as a point of departure and respect for human rights must be seen as the goal. One could not counter violence with violence, he stressed. Both manifestations and causes of terrorism must be dealt with.
EL HADJI GUISSE, Sub-Commission Expert, said everyone here was committed to combatting terrorism; no one here sanctioned it. If there could not be a definition of terrorism, one should at least understand its causes; it could not be defeated without understanding its causes. The matter had not been given nearly enough attention. And he hoped future reports would not contain long lists of causes but would emphasize the major causes. To ignore the root causes and only deal with the symptoms would not work.
SOO GIL PARK, Sub-Commission Expert, said everyone recognized that after 11 September, the world had changed. An era of human rights and democracy had emerged after the end of the Cold War; the central question after 11 September was whether the era of human rights could survive. Reactions to the terrorist attacks had been extensive, and there had been an international coalition against terrorism established, but the question of human rights had received nowhere near enough importance in these quarters; it had to be understood that respect for human rights was a cornerstone of fighting terrorism. One could not turn into a monster while fighting monsters. The problems leading to terrorism were extensive and would continue to surface and to have their effects; due attention to the root causes and to human rights was the essential way to respond. The Sub-Commission had to consider how it could contribute to the debate on the topic; among other things, it could review the human rights effects of anti-terrorist legislation in various countries. Perhaps there could be an agenda item on counter-terrorism measures and human rights.
ASBJORN EIDE, Sub-Commission Expert, said 11 September had created a new situation and he understood the bewilderment of the Special Rapporteur. Last year, the focus had been on the effects of terrorism on human rights. This year, the emphasis was almost the opposite, the developments in the field of counter-terrorist measures and their relationship to human rights. Both aspects were needed. Human rights measures to prevent or combat terrorism could be confined, and indeed they must be combined
The realization of human rights for all was the most important tool in order to prevent or to reduce the likelihood of terrorist action, but the realization depended on all actors, not only the States. He had argued for many years that the Sub-Commission must be fully attentive to both sides of the coin of human rights protection. It was important to be vigilant in reminding Governments of their duty at all times to respect human rights, but equally vigilant in reminding non-state actors of their duty never to resort to acts of terror or engage systematically in other human rights violations.



* *** *