SUBCOMMISSION ON THE RESOLUTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN CONGO
20 August 1999
MORNING
HR/SC/99/23
20 August 1999
Also adopts Chairman’s Statement on Togo
The Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights this morning began voting on matters, adopting a resolution and a chairperson’s statement concerning the human rights situation in two African countries. The body also moved closer to completing discussions on its entire agenda, finishing debate on the administration of justice and human rights, and the freedom of movement.
The drafts concerned Togo and the Congo, and called on the Governments to make efforts to ensure that all human rights were respected and protected.
Following two procedural votes that allowed experts to take secret ballot votes on country-specific resolutions under any agenda item, the Subcommission adopted without a vote a newly-submitted draft about the situation of human rights in Togo. The Chairperson’s statement endorsed the Government’s proposal requesting the Secretary-Generals of the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity to create a commission of inquiry to help it fulfill its mandate under international standards.
A representative of the Togolese Government opposed the original resolution, which he said was drafted after faulty information was provided by the non-governmental organization (NGO) Amnesty International. The representative said his country was in favour of a commission of inquiry on the matter.
In a resolution about human rights violations in the Congo, which was adopted by a secret vote of 20 in favor, 3 against, and 2 abstaining, the Subcommission called upon the Congolese Government to cease all violations of human rights there, to ratify various international agreements, and to request that the Secretary-General submit a report to the Commission on Human Rights and the Subcommission next year.
But a delegate from the Congo argued about whether there was a necessity for a resolution. He maintained that the country was still recovering from a civil war that ended only in 1997, and that passage of such a document would harm a country that was already in a difficult situation. A new Constitution had been established, an amnesty had been offered by the President for anyone who had renounced violence, a transitional Government had been in place and elections were scheduled to be held.
A resolution on the situation of human rights in Belarus was pending when the morning session ended.
Before voting commenced, the Subcommission completed its discussion on the administration of justice and human rights, and started and finished its deliberations on the freedom of movement.
Nations addressing the session were Armenia, Morocco, Ethiopia, Turkey, Egypt and Bahrain,
NAOS which spoke to the Subcommission were Transnational Radical Party; Interfaith International; and Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation.
The Subcommission will reconvene at 3 p.m. to continue voting on resolutions.
Resolutions and chairman’s statements
In a resolution (E/CN.4/Sub.2/1999/L.5) on the situation of human rights in the Congo, adopted withouta vote, the Subcommission called upon the Congolese Government to immediately cease all violations of human rights in the Congo, ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and the draft optional protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights establishing the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights; requested the Secretary-General to submit a report on the situation of human rights in the Congo to the Commission on Human Rights and the Subcommission at their next sessions; recommended to the Commission that it consider the situation of human rights in the Congo at its next session; and decided, if the Commission was unable to do so, to continue consideration of the question at its 52nd session under the same name.
In a Chairperson's statement on Togo delivered on behalf of the Subcommission for Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, the Subcommission welcomed the initiative of the Togolese Government to set up an international commission of enquiry in compliance with international standards; welcomed the proposition of the Togolese Government to ask the Secretary-Generals of the United Nations and of the Organisation of African Unity to constitute the commission of enquiry according to international standards; took note of the intent of the Togolese Government to ask the Secretary-Generals of the UN and of the Organisation of African Unity to provide the necessary assistance for the fulfilment of its mandate. The Togolese Government had engaged to provide the international commission of enquiry with aid and support so that it could fulfill its mandate in compliance with international standards and in a reasonable period; to take all appropriate action so that the competent authorities cooperate fully with the international commission of enquiry. The Subcommission requested that the Secretary-Generals of the UN and of the Organisation for African Unity report to the Subcommission at its next session of the result of the actions undertaken in the context of this statement.
Statements of Chairmen’s Statement on Togo
HARRY OLYMPIO (Togo) said on 5 May 1999, Amnesty International published a report on the country that was contrary to the real situation of human rights in Togo. Amnesty used to be known for the seriousness and independence of its studies. But this report was characterized by its frivolousness. The report proved nothing, because it did not follow the views of impartiality. Its authors only heard the views of Government opposition, who manipulated them shamelessly. Unsubstantiated claims were made, particularly that hundreds of cadavers discovered in Togo. That was more surprising because it was alleged to have occurred in June 1998. There were many foreign observers there because of the presidential elections at that time, and none of them saw the hundreds of bodies.
EL-HADJI GUISSE, Subcommission Expert said that in regards to the resolution on Togo, the resolution should be withdrawn because the Government of Togo made a proposal which could be satisfactory to everyone, but the spirit of the resolution would remain in the room until the study was complete. We hope that the dialogue would lead to the objectives that were being sought.
ERICA-IRENE A. DAES, Subcommission Expert, said she supported withdrawing the draft resolution.
HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Subcommission Expert, had no objection to withdrawing the resolution, but it was possible that not all the experts had read it. This should process not be a precedent.
PAULO SERGIO PINHEIRO, Subcommission Expert, said it was very important to understand that the thrust of the draft resolution was not being given up.
JOSE BENGOA, Subcommission Expert, said he was rather surprised by what was heard in the room. The resolution should state clearly that the case would be presented again next year. He said he had some doubts about the situation.
BETRAM RAMCHARAN, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, said the there had been some advice given on the contents of the resolution, although the Commission did not partake in the substance of the report. This discussion took place between the Minister and the Subcommission. The minister was told that should the resolution be adopted, the Subcommission would be informed about the rules for such an initiative. To proceed, there would be consultations with the OAU to set up a commission of three persons which would report to the Secretary-General and the OAU. On the basis of the report, the commission would report to the Subcommission. Appropriate consultations with the president of Subcommission, with the Togolese authorities, and with others would be made. It was understood that Amnesty International would be involved in the process of the consultation.
EL-HADJI GUISSE, Subcommission Expert, said that two points had been made. It would like to ensure that the experts did not ignore everything about the African situation. Amnesty International was an NGO that could help, but not officially.
GUOXIANG FAN, Subcommission Expert, said that it was understood what Mr. Joinet had done and this was important work. The Secretary-General and the High Commissioner had intervened. That was important. But it would have been easier if the text could have been read a little earlier, although the difficulties were understood.
BERTRAM RAMCHARAN, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, said there would be a process with the two Secretary-Generals, and this would be in consultation with the Togolese authorities. The number of three had been mentioned for the commission. The nomination process would be the result of the process with the two Secretaries-General. Regarding Mr. Guisse's point, the Commissioner for Human Rights had extraordinary sensitivity to this point. There would most likely be a heavy African content to the commission. Regarding Amnesty's participation, it was said it would participate with others to assist the inquiry. It was necessary to mention Amnesty because it had been mentioned in the statement and by the Minister. In the final analysis, it would be up to the commission, but it was expected to be necessary to give them the possibility to submit information to the commission.
HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Subcommission Expert, said there was no way one should associate any NGO into an official inquiry. There was a contradiction arising from information given by NAOS.
BERTRAM RAMCHARAN, Deputy Commissioner for Human Rights, said that there was an error in the translation. There would be consultation with concerned people and organisations, and they would be asked for information. But the process would not officially involve Amnesty International.
DAVID WEISSBRODT, Subcommission Expert, said this resolution was very appropriate.
ASBJORN EIDE, Subcommission Expert, said he was pleased with the proceedings and would have been shocked had Amnesty not been asked to participate.
LOUIS JOINET, Subcommission Expert, said when there was talk about finances, it was learned about how much an investigation could cost. In the initial text, until late last night, there was only the United Nations. It was because of this that it was requested that the two Secretary-Generals be included -- the UN and the Organization of African Unity. It was Amnesty's report that was targeted, but there were others sources for information. Obviously, all assurances would be made that an investigation would be done on the basis of Amnesty information.
Statement on Congo Resolution
JUSTIN BIABAROH-IBORO (Congo) said there was opposition to the resolution. This was a resolution on a country that was not informed in enough time to give its view or open a cooperative dialogue. This called into question the credibility of the Subcommission. The situation in the Congo had evolved considerably. At the end of the civil war in 1997, a forum on peace was held, a transitional government was put in place, and elections were going to be held. Unfortunately, that was not to the liking of those that started the civil war in the Congo. There were attacks from mercenaries. These attacks led to other violence and other acts of terror against civilians.
The Government called for peace, and decided to halt the war to save the republic. All of this military action led to serious problems for the civilian population, but at no point did the Government order punishments against the civilian population. Today, the Congo was putting an end to its insecurity and was heading toward normalcy. A new Constitution had been established, and on 15 August the President announced an amnesty for those who would put down their weapons and renounce violence. Everything was not rosy, that was true. But this resolution would harm a country that was already in a difficult situation.
Statements on Belarus Draft Resolution
STANISLAU AGVRTSOU (Belarus) said that the Government of Belarus was willing to undertake several measures regarding the human rights situation in the country. First, the Special Rapporteur on Independence of the Judiciary and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention should visit the country. Second, the Government would do everything necessary during this coming year to join the Council of Europe and then sign and ratify the European Convention on Human Rights. Next year it would create a post of ombudsman and hold free and fair Parliamentary elections. It would ensure that newspapers and magazines were not subject to censorship. The Government would prepare a written report to the Subcommission and submit that report at least one month prior to the Subcommission session in August 2000 as to the steps that had been undertaken in this regard.
HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Subcommission Expert, said dialogue and discussions such as this were important and could lead to the positive promotion of human rights.
MAGILL ALFONSO MARTINEZ, Subcommission Expert, thanked those who participated directly in the discussions. However, it appeared that this agreement was reached either this morning or yesterday. If possible, it would be helpful to have a copy of the text to see the details. There was agreement that regional covenants and agreements really have to do with the government themselves.
EL-HADJI GUISSE, Subcommission Expert, said there was the possibility that there could be a serious problem for the future. Belarus gave only promises for the future. This would open up a serious question. What have they done so far? Everything that was said was said about what they would do in the future.
JOSE BANGE, Subcommission Expert, said that he had similar concerns as Mr. Guisse. The resolution presented a situation of present human rights; nothing of the kind was presented in the chairmen's statement. Care should be taken when negotiations were going on in the room. If the resolution levelled an accusation as serious as this, it had to go into the statement of the chairman.
LOUIS JOINET, Subcommission Expert, said he agreed with Mr. Guisse’s assessment. The fundamental aim of the resolution was a starting point to get to another place, which would be positive. There were two initiatives which involved negotiations -- confidence and dialogue. This course should continue. If nothing happened next year, the failure would be indicated. As to the other observation, it would not be worth it to have a chairman’s statement if serious criticisms were levelled. You can't trap flies with vinegar.
PAULO SARGE PINHEIRO, Subcommission Expert, there should be happiness about a State’s desire to join a regional organization.
J. SORABJEE, Subcommission Expert, said this does not drop the resolution, but merely defers a debate until the next session. If the Government doesn't undertake what they said they would until next year, it would be dealt with. Nothing was gained from passing resolutions. This was a positive track.
ASBJORN EIDE, Subcommission Expert, said there was nothing wrong with including a reference to regional instruments.
TEIMURAZ RAMISHVILI, Subcommission Expert, said one of the elements in this work was to support dialogue. This was an example of that. This was one of the best methods to do the Subcommission's work. In coming here, scenarios were not already made. They must know that the independent experts of the Subcommission were ready to carefully listen to the views of everyone.
FRANCOISE HAMPSON, Subcommission Expert, said the specific allegations of violations in the resolution were met in various forums, for example the working groups. The complaints against the Government were met by the proposals the Government was taking. It was completely appropriate for a State to indicate its intention to ratify a regional treaty.
Statements on administration of justice
KAREN NAZARIAN (Armenia) underlined the importance of the recognition as international crimes of human rights violations committed on State orders and sanctioned by them, as well as those perpetrated by certain groups and individuals. The last decade of the 20th Century had been marked with conflicts paving the way to widespread violations of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms affecting large segments of the civilian populations. Minority groups were the major and most frequent victims of this scourge. It was clear that the responsibility of governments and individuals who exercised these crimes were inseparable. The recognition of gross and massive violations of human rights as international crime would help resolve a number of extremely important issues. It was vital to outline the responsibility of States and individuals which could result from such recognition.
IULA ANTOANELLA MOTOC, Subcommission Expert, said that the report presented by expert Hector Fix-Zamudio was a concentrated course on comparative constitutional law and freedoms. The report could be the base of a comparative study between universal human rights and regional ones. She suggested the legislation that exists today in the central and eastern European States could be compared with States in Latin America. Regarding the Office of the Prosecutor General, it might be interesting to see how the remaining socialist countries see the relationship between human rights and socialist legalities.
Right of reply
The representative of Morocco, in a right of reply, said the Government had promised to settle the various cases concerning those who disappeared, as raised by two NAOS. Morocco established a commission to determine compensation for those who disappeared or who were arbitrarily detained. It is composed of three magistrates, a human rights expert, and a representative of the Ministry of Justice, among others. They met for the first time last week. The authorities were sparing no effort to make reparations to the victims.
The representative of Ethiopia said, in a right of reply, that remarks made by the International Movement for Fraternal Union Among Races and Peoples constituted a concerted hate campaign against the democratically elected Government of Ethiopia. The speaker presented fabricated stories of human rights abuses. The defendants had fully exercised their right to present their defense. The court found the defendants guilty as charged and they were sentenced. Another defendant who was serving his term was ill and hospitalised. He was discharged from custody and allowed to travel abroad on humanitarian ground. Regarding the situation of women in Ethiopia, they had the right to affirmative measures and the right to the elimination of influences of harmful customs and laws. The Government of Ethiopia was taking measures to bring about rapid changes to the status of women in the country.
The representative of Turkey, in a right of reply, said it felt compelled to take the floor to express disappointment and indignation for having learned that an NGO abused the platform of the Subcommission by giving an umbrella representation to the lawyers of Abdullah Ocalan. Ocalan was a criminal who was responsible for the murder of over 30,000 people. And his lawyers had no NGO status. The NGO abused its consultative status with ECOSOC and its subsidiary bodies by giving them a place in its ranks. It was requested that the authenticity of this representation be checked.
The representative of Egypt, in a right of reply, said the International Federation of Human Rights criticized legislation in Egypt. However, this legislation must be seen from a historical perspective. In the preparation of this law, NAOS in Egypt participated in the process. Certain NAOS had expressed reservations about the law, but there a healthy dialogue had taken place. When considering legislation in Egypt one should look at the final results; Egyptian NAOS and the Government both wanted to ensure effective participation in all areas of society. The entire text of this law was available in English to NAOS.
The representative of Bahrain said a statement made yesterday was inaccurate and did not reflect accurately the situation in Bahrain. There was a new era in Bahrain, and a new strategy.
Statements in the debate on freedom of movement
OLGA CECHUROVA, (Transnational Radical Party) said that the population displacement in the autonomous regions of China Tibet, Eastern Turkestan and Inner Mongolia needed the attention of the Subcommission. The peoples in these regions faced continuos massive and government sponsored population transfers of ethnic Chinese and suffered serious violations of their human and political rights. Examples given of problems caused by an influx of ethnic Chinese were: population transfers, severe birth control policies, unemployment, hunger and poverty. Government posts were usually occupied by Chinese. There was a lack of proper medical treatment. Most children grew up with poor sanitation which lead to illness and disease. Any funding, co-operation agreements or multilateral assistance to China must be conditioned on human rights improvements.
ALI ALI AL-ADHADH of (Interfaith International) said that the food and medicine that was shipped out of Iraq was destined for the Iraqi people; the citizens of Iraq had been deprived of important items. The United Nations had authorized an exchange of food for petroleum; the Government of Iraq was required to distribute food stocks to the Iraqi people. The situation in Iraq was deteriorating. People had also been displaced in Iraq, in particular, the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs.
K. WARIKOO (Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation) said the problems of population displacements was very serious. There were many internally displaced people in the world. The reasons for this was, among other things, armed conflict, terrorist violence and xenophobia. The issue of religious persecution and terrorist violence had caused population displacements in parts of South and central Asia; this had not been adequately studied. The situation for the displaced Kashmiri Hindus, who were forced out by Islamist extremists, terrorists and mercenaries, was mentioned. They have been displaced for ten years and deprived of their rights to life, property, education and employment. Their social fabric had been destroyed; the breakdown of their families had begun. After cleansing the Kashmir valley of its Hindu minority, Pakistan had now trained its guns on a number of border areas. The fate of the Shia population of Kargila was similar. Lives have been lost and the infrastructure of these people shattered. These were violent attempts to re-draw territorial boundaries; the result has been ethnic cleansing. People should be restored to their homelands.
Correction
In the press release HR/SC/99/23 of 19 August 1999 afternoon on page 4, paragraph 4, the speaker for Centre Europe-Tiers Monde should have read Christophe Koessler.
HR/SC/99/23
20 August 1999
Also adopts Chairman’s Statement on Togo
The Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights this morning began voting on matters, adopting a resolution and a chairperson’s statement concerning the human rights situation in two African countries. The body also moved closer to completing discussions on its entire agenda, finishing debate on the administration of justice and human rights, and the freedom of movement.
The drafts concerned Togo and the Congo, and called on the Governments to make efforts to ensure that all human rights were respected and protected.
Following two procedural votes that allowed experts to take secret ballot votes on country-specific resolutions under any agenda item, the Subcommission adopted without a vote a newly-submitted draft about the situation of human rights in Togo. The Chairperson’s statement endorsed the Government’s proposal requesting the Secretary-Generals of the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity to create a commission of inquiry to help it fulfill its mandate under international standards.
A representative of the Togolese Government opposed the original resolution, which he said was drafted after faulty information was provided by the non-governmental organization (NGO) Amnesty International. The representative said his country was in favour of a commission of inquiry on the matter.
In a resolution about human rights violations in the Congo, which was adopted by a secret vote of 20 in favor, 3 against, and 2 abstaining, the Subcommission called upon the Congolese Government to cease all violations of human rights there, to ratify various international agreements, and to request that the Secretary-General submit a report to the Commission on Human Rights and the Subcommission next year.
But a delegate from the Congo argued about whether there was a necessity for a resolution. He maintained that the country was still recovering from a civil war that ended only in 1997, and that passage of such a document would harm a country that was already in a difficult situation. A new Constitution had been established, an amnesty had been offered by the President for anyone who had renounced violence, a transitional Government had been in place and elections were scheduled to be held.
A resolution on the situation of human rights in Belarus was pending when the morning session ended.
Before voting commenced, the Subcommission completed its discussion on the administration of justice and human rights, and started and finished its deliberations on the freedom of movement.
Nations addressing the session were Armenia, Morocco, Ethiopia, Turkey, Egypt and Bahrain,
NAOS which spoke to the Subcommission were Transnational Radical Party; Interfaith International; and Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation.
The Subcommission will reconvene at 3 p.m. to continue voting on resolutions.
Resolutions and chairman’s statements
In a resolution (E/CN.4/Sub.2/1999/L.5) on the situation of human rights in the Congo, adopted withouta vote, the Subcommission called upon the Congolese Government to immediately cease all violations of human rights in the Congo, ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and the draft optional protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights establishing the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights; requested the Secretary-General to submit a report on the situation of human rights in the Congo to the Commission on Human Rights and the Subcommission at their next sessions; recommended to the Commission that it consider the situation of human rights in the Congo at its next session; and decided, if the Commission was unable to do so, to continue consideration of the question at its 52nd session under the same name.
In a Chairperson's statement on Togo delivered on behalf of the Subcommission for Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, the Subcommission welcomed the initiative of the Togolese Government to set up an international commission of enquiry in compliance with international standards; welcomed the proposition of the Togolese Government to ask the Secretary-Generals of the United Nations and of the Organisation of African Unity to constitute the commission of enquiry according to international standards; took note of the intent of the Togolese Government to ask the Secretary-Generals of the UN and of the Organisation of African Unity to provide the necessary assistance for the fulfilment of its mandate. The Togolese Government had engaged to provide the international commission of enquiry with aid and support so that it could fulfill its mandate in compliance with international standards and in a reasonable period; to take all appropriate action so that the competent authorities cooperate fully with the international commission of enquiry. The Subcommission requested that the Secretary-Generals of the UN and of the Organisation for African Unity report to the Subcommission at its next session of the result of the actions undertaken in the context of this statement.
Statements of Chairmen’s Statement on Togo
HARRY OLYMPIO (Togo) said on 5 May 1999, Amnesty International published a report on the country that was contrary to the real situation of human rights in Togo. Amnesty used to be known for the seriousness and independence of its studies. But this report was characterized by its frivolousness. The report proved nothing, because it did not follow the views of impartiality. Its authors only heard the views of Government opposition, who manipulated them shamelessly. Unsubstantiated claims were made, particularly that hundreds of cadavers discovered in Togo. That was more surprising because it was alleged to have occurred in June 1998. There were many foreign observers there because of the presidential elections at that time, and none of them saw the hundreds of bodies.
EL-HADJI GUISSE, Subcommission Expert said that in regards to the resolution on Togo, the resolution should be withdrawn because the Government of Togo made a proposal which could be satisfactory to everyone, but the spirit of the resolution would remain in the room until the study was complete. We hope that the dialogue would lead to the objectives that were being sought.
ERICA-IRENE A. DAES, Subcommission Expert, said she supported withdrawing the draft resolution.
HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Subcommission Expert, had no objection to withdrawing the resolution, but it was possible that not all the experts had read it. This should process not be a precedent.
PAULO SERGIO PINHEIRO, Subcommission Expert, said it was very important to understand that the thrust of the draft resolution was not being given up.
JOSE BENGOA, Subcommission Expert, said he was rather surprised by what was heard in the room. The resolution should state clearly that the case would be presented again next year. He said he had some doubts about the situation.
BETRAM RAMCHARAN, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, said the there had been some advice given on the contents of the resolution, although the Commission did not partake in the substance of the report. This discussion took place between the Minister and the Subcommission. The minister was told that should the resolution be adopted, the Subcommission would be informed about the rules for such an initiative. To proceed, there would be consultations with the OAU to set up a commission of three persons which would report to the Secretary-General and the OAU. On the basis of the report, the commission would report to the Subcommission. Appropriate consultations with the president of Subcommission, with the Togolese authorities, and with others would be made. It was understood that Amnesty International would be involved in the process of the consultation.
EL-HADJI GUISSE, Subcommission Expert, said that two points had been made. It would like to ensure that the experts did not ignore everything about the African situation. Amnesty International was an NGO that could help, but not officially.
GUOXIANG FAN, Subcommission Expert, said that it was understood what Mr. Joinet had done and this was important work. The Secretary-General and the High Commissioner had intervened. That was important. But it would have been easier if the text could have been read a little earlier, although the difficulties were understood.
BERTRAM RAMCHARAN, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, said there would be a process with the two Secretary-Generals, and this would be in consultation with the Togolese authorities. The number of three had been mentioned for the commission. The nomination process would be the result of the process with the two Secretaries-General. Regarding Mr. Guisse's point, the Commissioner for Human Rights had extraordinary sensitivity to this point. There would most likely be a heavy African content to the commission. Regarding Amnesty's participation, it was said it would participate with others to assist the inquiry. It was necessary to mention Amnesty because it had been mentioned in the statement and by the Minister. In the final analysis, it would be up to the commission, but it was expected to be necessary to give them the possibility to submit information to the commission.
HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Subcommission Expert, said there was no way one should associate any NGO into an official inquiry. There was a contradiction arising from information given by NAOS.
BERTRAM RAMCHARAN, Deputy Commissioner for Human Rights, said that there was an error in the translation. There would be consultation with concerned people and organisations, and they would be asked for information. But the process would not officially involve Amnesty International.
DAVID WEISSBRODT, Subcommission Expert, said this resolution was very appropriate.
ASBJORN EIDE, Subcommission Expert, said he was pleased with the proceedings and would have been shocked had Amnesty not been asked to participate.
LOUIS JOINET, Subcommission Expert, said when there was talk about finances, it was learned about how much an investigation could cost. In the initial text, until late last night, there was only the United Nations. It was because of this that it was requested that the two Secretary-Generals be included -- the UN and the Organization of African Unity. It was Amnesty's report that was targeted, but there were others sources for information. Obviously, all assurances would be made that an investigation would be done on the basis of Amnesty information.
Statement on Congo Resolution
JUSTIN BIABAROH-IBORO (Congo) said there was opposition to the resolution. This was a resolution on a country that was not informed in enough time to give its view or open a cooperative dialogue. This called into question the credibility of the Subcommission. The situation in the Congo had evolved considerably. At the end of the civil war in 1997, a forum on peace was held, a transitional government was put in place, and elections were going to be held. Unfortunately, that was not to the liking of those that started the civil war in the Congo. There were attacks from mercenaries. These attacks led to other violence and other acts of terror against civilians.
The Government called for peace, and decided to halt the war to save the republic. All of this military action led to serious problems for the civilian population, but at no point did the Government order punishments against the civilian population. Today, the Congo was putting an end to its insecurity and was heading toward normalcy. A new Constitution had been established, and on 15 August the President announced an amnesty for those who would put down their weapons and renounce violence. Everything was not rosy, that was true. But this resolution would harm a country that was already in a difficult situation.
Statements on Belarus Draft Resolution
STANISLAU AGVRTSOU (Belarus) said that the Government of Belarus was willing to undertake several measures regarding the human rights situation in the country. First, the Special Rapporteur on Independence of the Judiciary and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention should visit the country. Second, the Government would do everything necessary during this coming year to join the Council of Europe and then sign and ratify the European Convention on Human Rights. Next year it would create a post of ombudsman and hold free and fair Parliamentary elections. It would ensure that newspapers and magazines were not subject to censorship. The Government would prepare a written report to the Subcommission and submit that report at least one month prior to the Subcommission session in August 2000 as to the steps that had been undertaken in this regard.
HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Subcommission Expert, said dialogue and discussions such as this were important and could lead to the positive promotion of human rights.
MAGILL ALFONSO MARTINEZ, Subcommission Expert, thanked those who participated directly in the discussions. However, it appeared that this agreement was reached either this morning or yesterday. If possible, it would be helpful to have a copy of the text to see the details. There was agreement that regional covenants and agreements really have to do with the government themselves.
EL-HADJI GUISSE, Subcommission Expert, said there was the possibility that there could be a serious problem for the future. Belarus gave only promises for the future. This would open up a serious question. What have they done so far? Everything that was said was said about what they would do in the future.
JOSE BANGE, Subcommission Expert, said that he had similar concerns as Mr. Guisse. The resolution presented a situation of present human rights; nothing of the kind was presented in the chairmen's statement. Care should be taken when negotiations were going on in the room. If the resolution levelled an accusation as serious as this, it had to go into the statement of the chairman.
LOUIS JOINET, Subcommission Expert, said he agreed with Mr. Guisse’s assessment. The fundamental aim of the resolution was a starting point to get to another place, which would be positive. There were two initiatives which involved negotiations -- confidence and dialogue. This course should continue. If nothing happened next year, the failure would be indicated. As to the other observation, it would not be worth it to have a chairman’s statement if serious criticisms were levelled. You can't trap flies with vinegar.
PAULO SARGE PINHEIRO, Subcommission Expert, there should be happiness about a State’s desire to join a regional organization.
J. SORABJEE, Subcommission Expert, said this does not drop the resolution, but merely defers a debate until the next session. If the Government doesn't undertake what they said they would until next year, it would be dealt with. Nothing was gained from passing resolutions. This was a positive track.
ASBJORN EIDE, Subcommission Expert, said there was nothing wrong with including a reference to regional instruments.
TEIMURAZ RAMISHVILI, Subcommission Expert, said one of the elements in this work was to support dialogue. This was an example of that. This was one of the best methods to do the Subcommission's work. In coming here, scenarios were not already made. They must know that the independent experts of the Subcommission were ready to carefully listen to the views of everyone.
FRANCOISE HAMPSON, Subcommission Expert, said the specific allegations of violations in the resolution were met in various forums, for example the working groups. The complaints against the Government were met by the proposals the Government was taking. It was completely appropriate for a State to indicate its intention to ratify a regional treaty.
Statements on administration of justice
KAREN NAZARIAN (Armenia) underlined the importance of the recognition as international crimes of human rights violations committed on State orders and sanctioned by them, as well as those perpetrated by certain groups and individuals. The last decade of the 20th Century had been marked with conflicts paving the way to widespread violations of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms affecting large segments of the civilian populations. Minority groups were the major and most frequent victims of this scourge. It was clear that the responsibility of governments and individuals who exercised these crimes were inseparable. The recognition of gross and massive violations of human rights as international crime would help resolve a number of extremely important issues. It was vital to outline the responsibility of States and individuals which could result from such recognition.
IULA ANTOANELLA MOTOC, Subcommission Expert, said that the report presented by expert Hector Fix-Zamudio was a concentrated course on comparative constitutional law and freedoms. The report could be the base of a comparative study between universal human rights and regional ones. She suggested the legislation that exists today in the central and eastern European States could be compared with States in Latin America. Regarding the Office of the Prosecutor General, it might be interesting to see how the remaining socialist countries see the relationship between human rights and socialist legalities.
Right of reply
The representative of Morocco, in a right of reply, said the Government had promised to settle the various cases concerning those who disappeared, as raised by two NAOS. Morocco established a commission to determine compensation for those who disappeared or who were arbitrarily detained. It is composed of three magistrates, a human rights expert, and a representative of the Ministry of Justice, among others. They met for the first time last week. The authorities were sparing no effort to make reparations to the victims.
The representative of Ethiopia said, in a right of reply, that remarks made by the International Movement for Fraternal Union Among Races and Peoples constituted a concerted hate campaign against the democratically elected Government of Ethiopia. The speaker presented fabricated stories of human rights abuses. The defendants had fully exercised their right to present their defense. The court found the defendants guilty as charged and they were sentenced. Another defendant who was serving his term was ill and hospitalised. He was discharged from custody and allowed to travel abroad on humanitarian ground. Regarding the situation of women in Ethiopia, they had the right to affirmative measures and the right to the elimination of influences of harmful customs and laws. The Government of Ethiopia was taking measures to bring about rapid changes to the status of women in the country.
The representative of Turkey, in a right of reply, said it felt compelled to take the floor to express disappointment and indignation for having learned that an NGO abused the platform of the Subcommission by giving an umbrella representation to the lawyers of Abdullah Ocalan. Ocalan was a criminal who was responsible for the murder of over 30,000 people. And his lawyers had no NGO status. The NGO abused its consultative status with ECOSOC and its subsidiary bodies by giving them a place in its ranks. It was requested that the authenticity of this representation be checked.
The representative of Egypt, in a right of reply, said the International Federation of Human Rights criticized legislation in Egypt. However, this legislation must be seen from a historical perspective. In the preparation of this law, NAOS in Egypt participated in the process. Certain NAOS had expressed reservations about the law, but there a healthy dialogue had taken place. When considering legislation in Egypt one should look at the final results; Egyptian NAOS and the Government both wanted to ensure effective participation in all areas of society. The entire text of this law was available in English to NAOS.
The representative of Bahrain said a statement made yesterday was inaccurate and did not reflect accurately the situation in Bahrain. There was a new era in Bahrain, and a new strategy.
Statements in the debate on freedom of movement
OLGA CECHUROVA, (Transnational Radical Party) said that the population displacement in the autonomous regions of China Tibet, Eastern Turkestan and Inner Mongolia needed the attention of the Subcommission. The peoples in these regions faced continuos massive and government sponsored population transfers of ethnic Chinese and suffered serious violations of their human and political rights. Examples given of problems caused by an influx of ethnic Chinese were: population transfers, severe birth control policies, unemployment, hunger and poverty. Government posts were usually occupied by Chinese. There was a lack of proper medical treatment. Most children grew up with poor sanitation which lead to illness and disease. Any funding, co-operation agreements or multilateral assistance to China must be conditioned on human rights improvements.
ALI ALI AL-ADHADH of (Interfaith International) said that the food and medicine that was shipped out of Iraq was destined for the Iraqi people; the citizens of Iraq had been deprived of important items. The United Nations had authorized an exchange of food for petroleum; the Government of Iraq was required to distribute food stocks to the Iraqi people. The situation in Iraq was deteriorating. People had also been displaced in Iraq, in particular, the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs.
K. WARIKOO (Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation) said the problems of population displacements was very serious. There were many internally displaced people in the world. The reasons for this was, among other things, armed conflict, terrorist violence and xenophobia. The issue of religious persecution and terrorist violence had caused population displacements in parts of South and central Asia; this had not been adequately studied. The situation for the displaced Kashmiri Hindus, who were forced out by Islamist extremists, terrorists and mercenaries, was mentioned. They have been displaced for ten years and deprived of their rights to life, property, education and employment. Their social fabric had been destroyed; the breakdown of their families had begun. After cleansing the Kashmir valley of its Hindu minority, Pakistan had now trained its guns on a number of border areas. The fate of the Shia population of Kargila was similar. Lives have been lost and the infrastructure of these people shattered. These were violent attempts to re-draw territorial boundaries; the result has been ethnic cleansing. People should be restored to their homelands.
Correction
In the press release HR/SC/99/23 of 19 August 1999 afternoon on page 4, paragraph 4, the speaker for Centre Europe-Tiers Monde should have read Christophe Koessler.