SUB-COMMISSION CONTINUES CONSIDERATION OF THE VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS

Sub-Commission on the Promotion
and Protection of Human Rights
55th session
30 July 2003
Morning





Discusses New Role of the Sub-Commission; Counter-Terrorism Measures
which Infringe on Human Rights; and Other Issues


The Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights continued its debate this morning on the question of the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including policies of racial discrimination and segregation, in all countries, with particular reference to colonial and other dependent countries and territories.

After hearing from a number of non-governmental organizations claiming violations of human rights in specific countries, and government representatives who spoke, among other things, about national efforts to uphold human rights, the Sub-Commission's Experts took the floor. Several Experts spoke about the transformation of the role of the Sub-Commission after the Commission on Human Rights told it not to adopt resolutions on human rights violations in specific countries. A number of Experts also spoke about how State policies against terrorism were infringing on human rights.

Sub-Commission Expert Jose Bengoa said that the Sub-Commission had been transformed by its higher authority and now served as a think tank. This was why the Sub-Commission had been mobilizing to look at new topics and priorities within the human rights agenda. Among other things, it could, as suggested by Acting High Commissioner for Human Rights Bertrand Ramcharan, consider the results of special procedures like Special Rapporteurs, Working Groups and treaty bodies, with a view to making recommendations to the Commission.

Expert Asbjorn Eide said no State, however powerful, should be allowed to be above the law, and the Sub-Commission should pay serious attention to this issue. The "free world" was not so free anymore, and it was becoming increasingly worrisome to see what was happening in the West. This concern was not just for the situations in Guatanamo and Iraq, but in the increasing ill treatment of incarcerated persons, the number of children living in poverty in the developed world, and a lack of attention to economic and social rights.

Sub-Commission Expert Francoise Jane Hampson said that counter-terrorist measures, whether legislative, judicial or operational, should be limited to those reasonably suspected of terrorist acts, and all actions should be undertaken in the context of human rights - unfortunately this last was frequently ignored.

And Expert Paulo Sergio Pinheiro said the Sub-Commission should find ways to deal comprehensively with the issue of State counter-terrorism measures, as well as the issue of torture; while Soo Gil Park said that the threat posed by terrorism to the promotion and protection of human rights was likely to continue thorough the next century, as countries both small and big continued to erode civil rights under the pretext of fighting terrorism.

Issues raised by speakers also included the identification of national freedom movements with terrorism; and the widespread practice of torture at the hands of State actors, despite almost universally ratified international legal instruments against this.

Other Experts who took the floor were Emmanuel Decaux, Soli Jehangir Sorabjee, Barbara Frey speaking on behalf of David Weissbrodt, Paulo Sergio Pinheiro,Yozo Yokota, and Florizelle O'Connor.

The Sub-Commission also concluded the election of officers for the session, electing Ms. O’Connor as Vice-President from the Latin American Group.

Addressing the Sub-Commission were the Centre Europe-Third World; the Transnational Radical Party; Indian Movement “Tupaj Amaru”; and Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation. Also speaking were the representatives of Bahrain and Pakistan.

Speaking in right of reply was the representative of Bolivia.

The Sub-Commission will reconvene at 3 p.m. this afternoon to conclude its general debate on the question of the violation of human rights, and to begin discussion of specific human rights issues, including women and human rights, contemporary forms of slavery, and new priorities, in particular terrorism.


Statements on the Question of the Violation of Human Rights, Including Policies of Racial Discrimination and Segregation, in All Countries

MALIK OZDEN, of Europe-Third World Centre, said the United States of America, the self-proclaimed champion of democracy, individual freedoms and human rights, had not ceased to take the world aback with its illegal actions perpetrated by the Government of George W. Bush. Since the deplorable events of 11 September 2001, several actions by the United States had been border line legal, including the aggression on Afghanistan, the violation of the rights of the supposed Taliban prisoners held in Guatanamo, the violation of the rights of migrants under the cover of the fight against terrorism, the aggression against Iraq, the continuance of the illegal embargo against Cuba, and others. The international community should call upon the United States to halt its illegal actions, reintegrate into the community of lawful States, and contribute to the promotion and protection of human rights.

VERENA THEPHSOUVANH, of Transnational Radical Party, said in the People's Democratic Republic of Lao, there was a denial of the rights of freedom of expression, freedom of demonstration, and freedom of the press; there were also arbitrary arrests, torture, persecution of ethnic minorities, repression of religious minorities, and an absence of impartiality and equity in the judiciary. These issues were extremely preoccupying. In the light of these grave and repeated infractions, the Sub-Commission should urgently send a mission to Laos to observe and enquire into the situation in the country. It should ask the Government to open the country to human rights non-governmental organizations as well as call on the authorities to halt all repression of religious minorities, modify legislation to put it in line with international conventions, and respect the Universal Declaration on Human Rights which was signed and ratified by the Government, as well as the other international conventions that it had signed.

LAZARO PARY, of the Indian Movement “Tupaj Amaru”, said following the tragic events of 11 September 2001, the world had changed direction. There were too many human rights violations in too many countries, particularly in Israel against Palestinians, and in Iraq by Americans. Today, the world watched powerlessly as the logic of war and State terrorism prevailed, and peace and security were threatened each day. National liberation movements had been identified as terrorists. Permanent human rights principles recognised by the international community faced enormous challenges from one hegemonic power, in open defiance of the United Nations Charter and the rules of international law that governed the relationships between people, and this with the complicity of other countries and without the consent of the Security Council, with no legal or moral justification. The architecture on which the international order was based had collapsed, and the United Nations, which represented the political conscience of humanity, was deprived of this role and was reduced to being a humanitarian organization.

KULBHUSHAN WARIKOO, of Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation, said that only after 11 September had the international community demonstrated its political resolve and commitment to launch the global campaign against terrorism and to stamp out the Taliban and Al Qaeda from Afghanistan. However, success of the peace and reconstruction in Afghanistan was hinged upon security, which remained precarious in several parts of the country due to the continued threat from the remnants of Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters. Similarly, during the past 14 years, the phenomenon of terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir had manifested itself in coercive intimidation of the civil population, introduction of radical Islam in society and culture, and the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms related to religion, expression, life, and destruction of properties. There had also been the ethnic-cleansing of Hindu minorities. As peace, democracy and human rights were inextricably linked, these goals needed to be pursued to ensure peace, stability and sustainable development in Jammu and Kashmir.

SAEED MOHAMED AL-FAIHANI (Bahrain) said the division in attention on civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights hindered the development of a comprehensive human rights strategy that could tackle human rights violations and protect fundamental freedoms. It was noteworthy that some of the most important non-governmental organizations were also implementing this division. In this connection, the Sub-Commission was invited to study this phenomenon and present its recommendations to the Commission on Human Rights. Bahrain believed that civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights were interrelated and indivisible. One could not approach human rights with only one set of rights and not the other.

During the past few years, Bahrain had experienced gradual and steady developments in the political, civil, economic, social and cultural fields. In the political field, this included the separation of power, an elected house of representatives, freedom of the press, and developments within the legal and judicial system. In the economic, social and cultural fields, Bahrain had embarked on economic developments to encourage foreign investment, such as training its citizens, constructing roads, developing the telecommunications sector and promoting laws pertaining to trade, intellectual and industrial property. While Bahrain felt that there had been advancement in key areas, it was also just the beginning of the road. There were still many challenges that needed tackling, including increasing political awareness in the society. An important challenge was how to keep achievements in a politically unstable environment. In this connection, it was hoped that the instability created by the situation in the Middle East and the Gulf could be overcome by solving these problems in the near future.

IMTIAZ HUSSAIN (Pakistan) said the world today was marred by conflicts, poverty, hunger, disease, and subordination of universally recognised human rights to national concerns on safety. The United Nations Charter that came to reflect the consensus among the victors and the vanquished on not allowing violence and bloodshed to recur stood on shaky grounds. The concepts of collective security, supremacy of rule of law and an human rights based approach to international issues were all under assault. It was tragic that after suffering decades of repression, some freedom movements had been denigrated as terrorism while State terrorism had escaped international accountability. The events of 11 September 2001 had been used by many as an excuse to intensify repression, and stifle freedom of thought and conscience. The plight of the people under foreign occupation was a matter of grave concern for the Government of Pakistan, as this was a grave violation of human rights and abetted gross and systematic abuse of human rights with impunity. Peace facilitated the promotion of human rights.

EMMANUEL DECAUX, Sub-Commission Expert, said the fight against massive and systematic violations of human rights, whether it was with regard to planetary terrorism or civil war, passed through the reinforcement of the right, and not by its temporary suspension. However, to the theoretic difficulty of listing flagrant violations throughout the world, was added a more concrete difficulty. The Commission on Human Rights had frequently repeated that the Sub-Commission should not express itself on “geographical situations”, particularly the situation in Iraq. If today one could only rejoice at the fall of the Iraqi dictatorship, it was important to underline the importance of human rights in the country. The American victory would only be a durable success should peace progress at last in all the region. Only the end of provocations and violence on both sides could, under the pressure of the international community as a whole, give a chance for peace.

Attention paid to international crises should not stop the Sub-Commission from deliberating violations of human rights committed under states of autarky or perpetual neutrality. From North Korea to Turkmenistan, the results of Stalinism had not finished causing tragedies. There was a need for the Sub-Commission to pronounce itself on, in particular, the situation in Turkmenistan, where human rights were massively violated on a daily basis.

Human rights needed to be defended on all levels, with a liberation from fear and from misery. Faced with so many problems, such as under-development or the great pandemics, the fight against corruption and dictatorships-for-life, all should work together, since mankind’s dignity, which was the only answer to the cult of violence, was at stake.

JOSE BENGOA, Sub-Commission Expert, said that in recent years he had not spoken on item 2 since the Commission had more or less prevented the Sub-Commission from taking measures on human rights violation in specific countries. The Commission had essentially established a monopoly on dealing with specific countries and human rights violations. The discussion within the Sub-Commission on the resolution on human rights defenders had led to effective action. Nowadays, there was no instrument to act on. The Sub-Commission had been transformed by its higher authority and now served as a think tank. This was why the Sub-Commission had been mobilizing to look at new topics and priorities within the human rights agenda. It was a cause of alarm that short-term matters were no longer considered by the Sub-Commission. This year, there had been a feeling of great frustration with the work of the Commission and the resolutions it had passed. There was a sense that the Commission was burying its head in the sand as opposed to dealing with issues of concern world wide.

Mr. Ramcharan, the Acting High Commissioner for Human Rights, had asked several questions at the opening of the Sub-Commission which needed to be addressed. It had been suggested that under item 2, the Sub-Commission could consider the results of special procedures with a view to make recommendations to the Commission. He had then gone on to say that the Sub-Commission must consider the documents drawn up by Special Rapporteurs, Working Groups and treaty bodies. These ideas were interesting and must not be ignored. They represented a challenge to the Sub-Commission in assessing the progress of these human rights instruments so that the Commission could later turn this into a proactive and critical discussion. The only question that remained was whether this would not exceed the mandate of the Sub-Commission. The Sub-Commission must pass three draft resolutions under item 2 on the study of the results of the reports of the Special Rapporteurs for follow-up by the Commission; the results on proposals on Working Groups and other bodies with a view to propose recommendations to the Commission; and a study of mechanisms for the prevention of human rights violations in treaty bodies, including an analysis of follow-up bodies. This would make it clear whether or not the Sub-Commission was within its mandate and would create a framework for the Sub-Commission under item 2. With this initiative, as proposed by Mr. Ramcharan, the Sub-Commission could address the content of item 2 through an analysis of issues of the greatest importance to it.

ASBJORN EIDE, Sub-Commission Expert, said no State, however powerful, should be allowed to be above the law, and the Sub-Commission should pay serious attention to this issue. The Sub-Commission had been tremendously significant and successful historically, and it was hoped that this would continue in the future. However, it had had one particular role of importance, that of being a forum where all could meet, but this had now been indirectly prohibited by the parent body with the forbidding of country-specific resolutions. Studies needed to be held to identify those whose rights needed further protection, to study the response of the Governments concerned, and to examine what follow-up would be taken by the United Nations system. In doing this, agenda item 2 should continue to be used as an open dialogue between NGOs and Governments.

There had been a tendency in the past to divide the world into the “good” and the “bad”, with the countries of the West as the accusers, and the countries of the East as the accused. This had mainly historical reasons, and the introduction of international human rights institutions had been an effort to cancel this trend. However, the "free world" was not so free, and it was becoming increasingly worrisome to see what was happening in the West. This concern was not just for the situations in Guatanamo and Iraq, but in the increasing ill treatment of incarcerated persons, for example, the number of children living in poverty in the developed world, and a lack of attention to economic and social rights. The free world needed to pay attention to what was happening to people on the move globally, particularly in the situation of asylum seekers. The rule of law had been threatened in the case of judicial investigations against corrupt political leaders. The issue was of relevance in all the world, but increasingly in the West, and there was a need for increasing vigilance for the upholding of human rights norms and to make these obligations universally recognised and respected in a world in convulsion.

The Sub-Commission needed to, as Mr Bengoa had said, draft resolutions on the three topics suggested by Mr Ramcharan.

SOLI JEHANGIR SORABJEE, Sub-Commission Expert, said the talk about the lack of effectiveness and credibility of the Sub-Commission had been particularly affected by the unilateral action of the United States in its attack against Iraq. Equally, countries had been unilaterally referred to as part of an axis of evil, which was shocking in itself, but particularly surprising given the actions of the accusing country. Therefore, today the credibility and effectiveness of the Sub-Commission was of particular importance. If any mandate was breached as the Sub-Commission undertook its work, it was necessary to ensure that the mandate was either modified or abolished.
FRANCOISE JANE HAMPSON, Sub-Commission Expert, said human rights were essentially about security; security of life, food security, health security, physical security, social security, and identity security. Daily gross violations of human rights in areas where conflicts took place were happening, some of which had been going on for a long time, and others which had been resurgent recently. As always, the principle victims were women and children and ethnic minorities. Paradoxically, in a world that saw interventions that were unwanted by the local population, in situations where the population did wish for them, they were inadequate and late.

Governments sought to justify their reactions and illegal actions under the pretext of the war against terrorism, frequently using an incorrect version of the definition of the term. States had a duty to protect all those under their jurisdiction, and counter-terrorist measures, whether legislative, judicial or operational, should be limited to those reasonably suspected of terrorist acts, and all actions should be undertaken in the context of human rights- unfortunately this last was frequently ignored. Counter-terrorist measures taken by States were often rapidly implemented in an absence of previous legislation, and new legislation was often objectionable, violating the obligation of clarity in criminal law, allowing for arbitrary detention, intrusive surveillance, limited unduly freedom of expression and of dissent, and other negative elements. Kenya and Hong Kong were areas where such legislation had been rejected massively by the civil population, but in many other cases there had been surprisingly little resistance, for example in the United States with the Patriot Acts, in the United Kingdom, and in Indonesia.

Since 11 September 2001, there had been arbitrary round ups and detention of suspects in many countries, with thousands of people disappearing, for example in Chechnya, the United States and the United Kingdom where non-British citizens were treated unequally. The United Nations system had had so far a negligible result on remedying this situation. Of particular concern was the virtually world-wide habit of States of transferring people in one national jurisdiction to another, outside the framework of extradition agreements, and all under the pretext of the fight against terrorism. States should be reminded that this was against international conventions, and discouraged from continuing these acts. There was a need for the Sub-Commission to consider how to deal more effectively with the issues raised under item 2.

BARBARA FREY, speaking for DAVID WEISSBRODT, Sub-Commission Expert, said the United Nations had led the world community in combating torture, and had established a strong international legal framework to prevent torture, which had been nearly universally ratified. Because of the broad international acceptance of the prohibition against torture as a matter of law, it had become a norm of customary international law. However, while the world community had good reason to be proud of all these efforts, the practice of torture continued largely unabated, with the use of torture documented in over 100 countries. Despite universal condemnation by governments, torture was still perpetrated with alarming regularity by State agents, either as a deliberate manifestation of State policy, or because of ineffective control of law enforcement agencies.

The broad objectives of torture and ill-treatment were to maintain repressive social control and to suppress any opposition to those individuals in power. The infliction of torture at the hands of non-State actors, including armed groups, was also a serious problem that affected many regions. To achieve the eradication of torture, the international community should support a much more robust and effective system to enforce international laws prohibiting torture. As with many other challenges in the field of human rights, in the coming decades there was a need to find ways to build much stronger institutions for the protection of human rights and develop a human rights culture that would require more comprehensive compliance with human rights norms.

This was, he said, a critical time to address the issue of torture because, regrettably, the international focus on terrorism had led to an increased risk of torture for many around the world, for example in the United States, Zimbabwe, Uzbekistan, and China. If one powerful nation ignored or delegitimised the United Nations Charter and the rest of international law, it risked destroying the very human rights it claimed to support. The world community needed to continue its efforts to strengthen the national and international legal and institutional systems to combat torture and its consequences, and Governments should pledge at the highest levels never to use torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading torture, even in times of emergency. Now was not a time to discard the fundamental legal principles of the international community because of the Government’s zeal to combat terrorism, instead, legal norms and institutional structures that prevented torture should be reinforced.

PAULO SERGIO PINHEIRO, Sub-Commission Expert, said the Commission, every year, reminded the Sub-Commission not to deal with geographic situations, but this did not mean that the discussion should be a ritual, an expensive ritual. It was time to change this practice. The Commission had decided that there would be no more country resolutions, but Jose Bengoa’s suggestion of finding ways to deal more effectively with issues under agenda item 2 seemed promising. It was important that the observers that participated in the meetings contributed with substantive issues, as opposed to just reacting to the mention of State names. There needed to be substantial discussion under every point of the agenda and national experts could contribute to this goal. The Sub-Commission must find ways to deal comprehensively with the issue of State counter-terrorism measures, as well as the issue of torture. The Acting High Commissioner had invited the Sub-Commission to address such issues in his statement at the opening of this Sub-Commission session. Also beneficial could be the introduction of an intra-sessional working group and the provision of more precise guidelines.

YOZO YOKOTA, Sub-Commission Expert, said with regard to sudden disappearances, this took place in Japan, where nationals were violently kidnapped by North Korean agents and forced to marry North Korean nationals. The Prime Minister of Japan had visited Pyongyang, and met with Kim Jong Yung, who had admitted that these kidnappings had taken place, and disclosed the fate of those abducted. Those still alive had been repatriated, but their family members, such as children, were still in North Korea. This was an example of grave violations of various human rights, including that of the right not to be subject to arbitrary detention. All of these rights were included in the binding international covenants to which North Korea was a party. For such serious violations, the Government of North Korea should formally and sincerely apologise to the victims of these kidnappings, and facilitate as soon as possible the return of the family members, disclose all information on the kidnappings, including on suspected cases, punish those guilty of the abductions, and provide compensation. The Commission on Human Rights had been advised of these events, and had taken action in the form of resolutions on this topic.

The importance of human rights education in the promotion and protection of human rights could not be underestimated, since the best way of preventing violations was to educate people on these rights. Human rights education should start in a family setting, and then be expanded to communities, with daily information on the topic disseminated in the media. Human rights education was necessary for government officials, judges, prosecutors, police officers, security officers, and other segments of the population. This was the case in Japan, where such education was Government policy, although work remained to be done. The Sub-Commission should adopt a resolution proposing a second United Nations Decade for human rights education, to start in 2005, since although a great deal had been achieved during the first decade, this would ensure that more progress would be made. The Sub-Commission in the next session should also have time available for reviewing the results of the First Decade, in order to make clear suggestions as to what should be done during the Second Decade.



FLORIZELLE O'CONNOR, Sub-Commission Expert, reacted to some of the comments made by her colleagues this morning, said the comments had accurately defined the feeling in the wider world as to whether these meetings were relevant. The way matters were handled led people to believe that there were two sets of human rights; one set of norms for the rich and one set for the poor. One must bring into focus the view of people on the ground; the people who the Sub-Commission claimed to defend. One of the main areas of focus needed to be the economy, since some of the conditions attached to trade, loans and agreements had real effects on citizens on the ground. Figures were irrelevant if they were not examined through the harsh lights of reality. Conclusions and recommendations needed to enhance the level playing field between the rich and the marginalized. Concerning the impact of human rights education, particularly in developing countries, she said they were taught using real life events. When a superpower undertook actions that were harsh to rationalize, one must explain why this was happening and why others could not act in such a manner. Human rights education therefore needed to start from the beginning to ensure that human rights became more real and meaningful to people on the ground.

SOO GIL PARK, Sub-Commission Expert, said since its creation 50 years ago, the United Nations had offered new hope to the poor and the oppressed throughout the world. The United Nations had been on the cutting edge of an era in human rights, and was the greatest institution for the protection and promotion of human rights throughout the globe, although the last few years had been very difficult, notably in the context of the events of 11 September, the threat posed by terrorism to the promotion and protection of human rights, and this was likely to continue thorough the next century, as countries both small and big continued to erode civil rights under the pretext of fighting terrorism.

There had been a shift in international relations away from norms of collective security, and towards bilateral belligerence, which was a dramatic shift away from the norms of the previous years. Protecting human rights was now a profound challenge, and one that needed to be faced up to effectively. The Sub-Commission needed to consider whether its concerns were those of the people who required aid and relief, notably in Liberia and in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where millions were still suffering. Similar impending catastrophes were still treated with indifference and disregard, although the actions of the International Criminal Court were welcomed in this context. It was indispensable to break the cycle of impunity for those guilty of war crimes, genocide, and ethnic cleansing.

Poverty affected millions across the globe, and prevented them from realising their human rights and capabilities. Humanity faced a daunting challenges on eradicating the problems caused by and causing poverty. The developed nations of the world needed to meet these desperate needs in a compassionate and appropriate manner. It was imperative that the world community remain focussed on achieving the benchmarks listed in the United Nations Millennium Declaration. In the face of human rights violations across the globe, there was a need for the Sub-Commission to react.


Right of Reply

A representative of Bolivia, exercising his right of reply, referred to a statement made by a non-governmental organization about Bolivia. As the entire region was facing one of the worst economic situations in decades, Bolivia was aiming to reduce poverty on the basis of a multi-disciplinary strategy. This included human rights, and the human rights of indigenous peoples, as provided for in the Bolivian magna carta. It was true that earlier this year, Bolivia had faced social disorder. Fortunately, the Government had been able to restore order.