AFTERNOON

10 March 2011

Concludes Interactive Dialogue with Special Rapporteurs on Human Rights Defenders and on Freedom of Religion or Belief

The Human Rights Council this afternoon opened its general debate on the promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development. The Council also concluded its interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteurs on the situation of human rights defenders and on freedom of religion or belief.

During the general debate on the promotion and protection of human rights, speakers said that regional, cultural, social, religious or other particularities could not be invoked to justify violations of international human rights. The ongoing social revolutions in North Africa and States in the Gulf clearly demonstrated the importance of Internet freedom and the tremendous potential that new technologies had in the advancement of freedom of expression and information. The continuing deterioration of the freedom of the media in several countries was a matter of great concern. Many journalists were seen as human rights defenders when addressing human rights issues in their work, and their safety and free work needed to be addressed.

Concerning the study on the role of international cooperation under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, speakers underlined the fact that the majority of persons with disabilities lived in less developed countries and that there was a need to refocus international cooperation towards other possible areas of cooperation such as research, technology transfer and humanitarian assistance. Several countries spoke on the right to self-determination and said that it was at the heart of the contemporary international order. It was up to the Council to reaffirm the importance of this right and the Council had a responsibility to actively pursue this fundamental collective human right of peoples and it should focus its attention on the denial of the basic right of self-determination to the people.

Regarding the report of the High Commissioner on the protection of human rights while countering terrorism, countries recognised persistent challenges in combating terrorism; however, they expressed concerns over the erosion of respect for due process, including the right to a fair trial. Concerning the right to development, speakers warned that hard-won development gains had been reversed as a result of multiple crises of the last few years, including global food, global economic and financial crises and the ensuing recession. Hence there was an urgent need for a structured dialogue on an ongoing basis to find ways and means to further implement the right to development and create a fair and conducive international economic environment.

Speaking in the general debate were Hungary on behalf of European Union, Nigeria on behalf of the African Group, Costa Rica on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries, Spain, Pakistan, United States, Cuba, Norway, Poland, Senegal, Algeria, Slovenia, Morocco, Iran, Lithuania on behalf of the Convening Group of the Community of Democracies, Namibia and Costa Rica.

Also speaking were Associazione Communità Papa Giovani XXIII and France Liberté.

At the beginning of the meeting, the Council concluded its interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders and the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief.

Margaret Sekaggya, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, in closing remarks, reiterated her call to States to focus on the protection of human rights defenders and decriminalisation of their work, and not so much on definition of their work and professional profiles.

Heiner Bielefeldt, Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, in his concluding remarks, said that the starting principle in discussions about diversity and freedom was the dignity of the human being and that the international community had to accommodate a broad range of diversity activities as an expression of human freedom.

In the context of the clustered interactive dialogue on human rights defenders and on freedom of religion or belief, many speakers shared the concern of the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders that women were subject to additional threats when defending human rights. Countries wished to know of more concrete measures to face threats, violence and human rights violations perpetrated by States and non-state actors. A speaker noted that the issue of education in schools was a sensitive and complex issue that needed to be addressed carefully, while others noted the importance of the role and institution of family in conveying religious values.

Speaking on human rights defenders and on freedom of religion or belief were: Holy See, Spain, United States, Paraguay, Algeria, Pakistan, Brazil, Sudan, Armenia, Russian Federation, Bangladesh, Sovereign Military Order of Malta, Luxembourg, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, Nigeria, Uzbekistan, Angola and Cuba.

Also speaking were the following national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations spoke: Indonesian Human Rights Commission Komnas, International Coordinating Committee of National Human Rights Institutions, Baha’i International Community, International Service for Human Rights, Mouvement Contre le Racisme et pour l’amitié entre les peoples in a joint statement, Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development, Human Rights First in a joint statement, Front Line in a joint statement, Pax Romana and CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation.

The next meeting of the Council will be at 10 a.m. on Friday 10 March 2011 when it will hold a panel discussion on human rights and issues related to terrorist hostage-taking. The general debate on the promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development, will resume at 3 p.m. tomorrow.

Interactive Debate on Situation of Human Rights Defenders and on Freedom of Religion or Belief

SILVANO TOMASI (Holy See) said that modern States were built up inter alia on the pillars of education, health and social assistance. The transmission to new generations of a religion was a social enrichment worthy of preservation and the right of parents to decide the type of religious education their children should receive took precedence over any open or indirect imposition by the State. Education and freedom of religion or belief constituted a vast area of concern but the inter relationship between the two was an evolving experiment and fundamental rights should not be transgressed. Public instruction should not treat the subject of religion in a way that led to the rejection of the parents’ preference and the advancement of an alternative set of beliefs. The assumption that a faith should change over time needed a cautious approach; undue interference in the internal life of faith communities would violate the fundamental human right of freedom of religion.

PABLO GOMEZ DE OLEA BUSTINZA (Spain) said that Spain welcomed the approach of the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders on women human rights defenders and persons working on women’s and gender issues. The work on those issues was essential for the building of integrated societies. The work of human rights defenders often meant criticizing public institutions and policies, but this should not be considered as a bad thing by States. Spain expressed its concern for the safety of women human rights defenders, given that police, army and paramilitary groups were shown in the report as perpetrators of violence against women human rights defenders. Spain called on all States to improve protection for this group of human rights defenders and to undertake investigation and prosecution of all violations.

PATRICK REILLY (United States) said the United States was concerned by the Special Rapporteur’s findings that in several regions of the world, not only were particular States failing to protect the human rights of women defenders by failing to create or implement national protection mechanisms, but a large number of violations were being perpetrated by agents or representatives of the States. In sustainable democracies, people were free to associate, to share and access information, and to speak, criticize and debate. Recent events had underscored the importance of the freedom of expression and assembly, and the United States was particularly concerned that brave women journalists and media professionals working on human rights issues as well as women trade unionists were exposed to great risks. The United States particularly appreciated the Special Rapporteur’s focus on human rights defenders working on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender issues. Turning to the report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, the United States thanked Mr. Bielefeldt for his efforts to safeguard religions freedom by engaging with States on allegations of governmental actions incompatible with these rights.

RAUL MARTINEZ (Paraguay) said Paraguay would refer to the report on the freedom of religion or belief as related to schooling. Freedom of religion in Paraguay was enshrined in specific articles of the national constitution. Paraguay believed the recommendations on the mandate on the freedom of religion or belief toward school teaching should be recognized. The Government of Paraguay had accepted the request of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief to visit Paraguay and looked forward to the role of his visit in establishing national public policies.

MOHAMMED SALIM SAMAR (Algeria) said that the upcoming extension of the mandate of Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders was an opportunity to raise certain issues. Algeria said that there was no specific professional category of human rights defenders, but anyone engaged in defence of human rights, be it as an institution or as an individual, was a human rights defender. The protection of human rights defenders must be in the hands of States and it was important that their defenders’ work was subscribed in the legal framework of a country. Algeria appreciated the continued cooperation with States by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and said that the issue of education in schools was a sensitive issue that needed to be addressed carefully. Algeria remained concerned by stereotyping of certain religion and by Islamophobic representations.

MUHAMMAD SAEED SARWAR (Pakistan) said that Pakistan attached importance to the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders. This year’s report presented an analysis of the communication sent by the mandate holder to States between 2004 and 2009. The report concluded that the review of the communications sent by the mandate during the said period revealed that women defenders and those working on women’s rights or gender issues seemed to be more at risk of being threatened, including death threats. Pakistan welcomed the cognizance taken by the Special Rapporteur on the grave situation of human rights defenders in Occupied Jammu and Kashmir as reflected in the communications in the addendum. Pakistan had expressed its concerns over the deteriorating situation of human rights and human rights defenders in Occupied Jammu and Kashmir in the past.

OTAVIO AUGUSTO DRUMMOND CANCADO TRINDADE (Brazil) said Brazil was grateful for the participation of the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders in a seminar, organized by the Government of Brazil, which was a fruitful occasion for the Government to review the National Programme for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders. The Government of Brazil attached great importance to this mandate and since the establishment in 2004 of the Brazilian Protection Programme, which had been subject to changes to fulfill the recommendations of the mandate; the federal Government had further expanded its partnerships with federal states. There were currently 170 human rights defenders under protection. The report arrived at the worrisome conclusion that women were subject to additional threats when defending human rights and Brazil would like to know of more concrete measures to face threats posed by non State actors against women human rights defenders.

Brazil agreed with the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief that in the context of schools both negative and positive guarantees to freedom of religion and belief should be ensured. Brazil was concerned about the situation of followers of certain religions or beliefs who were subject to discrimination in different parts of the world, such as the Baha’is, members of animist groups and followers of religions of African origin. The Government would like to know the view of the Special Rapporteur on the issue of official recognition of religions and what were the implications of this selectivity, in particular in the context of education.

RAHMA SALIH ELOBIED (Sudan) said that Sudan was a multiracial and multicultural country, in which the rights of each person to freedom of thought and to practice religion were guaranteed by the Constitution. Equality was the basis of all rights and obligations in Sudan and identity documents for example did not mention religion, while the Government had set up the Commission for the Protection of Non-Muslims in Khartoum. Sudan considered religious teaching as part and parcel of school curricula. Regarding women human rights defenders, Sudan felt that Sudanese women were full partners in the process of development and the building of the society. The national laws guaranteed full rights to women and the Government had set a number of mechanisms for redress in cases of human rights violations or violence. To empower women, the Constitution of 2007 enshrined the principles of equality and had promoted the participation of women in public and political life of the country.

VAHEH GEVORGYAN (Armenia) said that Armenia agreed with the approach of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief in distinguishing theological teaching from the information about religions. In the Armenian public school curricula, the religion-related studies were approached from the historic perspective. That was to say that the history of main religions in Armenia and in the world was recently established as part of the school curricula. Armenia was encouraged that the Special Rapporteur intended to continue paying close attention to the various manifestations of religious hatred and violence, particularly those which entailed deliberate destruction of religious symbols and religious monuments. Armenia had clearly condemned these grave incidents in the past and brought them to the attention of the Council. The country was hopeful to continue its cooperation with this mandate in this most important dimension as well.

ALEXEY DOBRINSKIY (Russian Federation) said the Russian Federation thanked the Special Rapporteurs for their reports. Russia noted the activities in the area of monitoring the situation of female human rights defenders but said that non State agents had a responsibility not to violate State laws. Also, in the Special Rapporteur’s report the category of human rights defenders was defined more broadly than in other United Nations documents and therefore the concept of the protection of human rights defenders required more clarification. Russia supported the conclusion of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief that the issue of religious symbols in school was complex and should be agreed to on a case by case basis. Russia stressed that the family was the most important factor for conveying religious values and it was in the family that an individual’s value system was shaped.

NAHIDA SOBHAN (Bangladesh) said Bangladesh agreed with the opinion of the Special Rapporteur on the freedom of religion or belief that women belonging to communities that were discriminated against faced multiple forms of discrimination on the basis of religion. This scenario was aggravated for many migrant women or women belonging to minorities. There was a growing tendency to defame religion in many parts of the world and this constituted a violation of freedom of religion or belief. It was necessary to promote ideals of tolerance and understanding through education, but Bangladesh did not think teaching or instructions about religions or beliefs were a major responsibility of general schools unless it was a religious school. Bangladesh instead upheld the role and institution of the family in this context. Turning to the report by the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders, Bangladesh said it valued efforts of every individual or groups working for the promotion and protection of human rights. Sometimes human rights defenders faced persecutions and women human rights defenders faced persecution on multiple levels and many a times by non-state actors. Bangladesh felt that the Special Rapporteur had diverted the focus from the real and universal issues of women defenders situation and the report did not reflect the universal situation of women human rights defenders. Bangladesh called on the Human Rights Council to remain vigilant so that the contribution of women human rights defenders did not perish into thin air.

MARIE-THERESE PICTET-ALTHANN (Sovereign Military Order of Malta) said that recent tragic events in some areas of the world had once again pushed the human right to freedom of religion and belief to the forefront of the international consciousness. The Council’s debate on this subject was therefore being held under pressing circumstances and the adoption of a resolution that firmly countered the prevailing waves of religious intolerance was of the utmost importance and would contribute to strengthening the Council’s authority. The Sovereign Military Order of Malta supported the aspiration of ensuring interaction of students of different religious or belief backgrounds with a view to creating mutual trust and understanding between young people of different denominations and religious. Previously an example of young people teaming up and working together was the international project launched by the Sovereign Military Order of Malta in 2009.

DANIEL DA CRUZ (Luxembourg) said that Luxembourg expressed its thanks to the Special Rapporteurs for their respective reports. Luxembourg fully supported the Special Rapportuer on freedom of religion or belief’s suggestion that there should be greater freedom of religion or belief in schools and supported the recommendation in the report concerning training teachers on human rights. What initiatives could be taken by the Human Rights Council to ensure high quality public education on human rights issues? The second question was in response to the recent violent attacks against religious minorities around the world: how should States act to combat effectively violence against persons of religious minorities?

SEBASTIEN MUTOMB MUJING (Democratic Republic of the Congo) said that the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo attached prime importance to the activities of human rights defenders on which it relied in its daily struggle for the promotion and protection of human rights. The human rights liaison unit had therefore been established in the Government to work together to find solutions to a wide range of issues. Provincial units had also been established to follow-up on a proximity basis on specific human rights issues on provincial levels. The officials from human rights non-governmental organizations participated in the Universal Periodic Review, for example. The Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo had always been interested in smooth functioning of human rights defenders and had in that sense initiated a bill on the protection of human rights defenders. Concerning the deplorable case of the death of Floribert Chebeya in June 2010, the Government was committed to completing the trial of those accused, a process which had started in November 2010.

MARIA DEL CARMEN VIVAR (Ecuador) thanked both Special Rapporteurs for their report and presentation and said that Ecuador commended the dialogue that the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders maintained with Governments and relevant actors. Ecuador appreciated the fact that the Rapporteur had presented a report that encompassed the level of risk and vulnerability in which females and women found themselves. It was important to have a true gender based approach in this area as well as a special care one. Ecuador’s Government had taken measures which included concrete actions to protect the rights of defenders and their families and they had sent a social card for human rights defenders to increase their protection. Ecuador was working on cases that had drawn the attention of the Special Rapporteur and asked her to review with greater care the allegations that she received.

OSITADINMA ANAEDU (Nigeria) said that Nigeria would like to clarify the position in respect of the Jos crisis in the country’s north-central region which was addressed in the report by the Special Rapporteur on the freedom of religion or belief. The Government had emphasized from the outset that the crisis in Jos was not religious in nature and was not between Christians and Muslims, on the contrary, it was a crisis that was perpetrated by a group of persons who sought to manipulate the ethnic, political and religious differences among the inhabitants of the area. The Government had carried out a broad based inquiry under the National Security Adviser and the President of Nigeria and other high level officials were directly involved in interactions with stakeholders towards finding a permanent solution to the crisis. Suspects were prosecuted and though the prosecution was laborious and time consuming, the Government was determined to conclude the ongoing trials as deterrence to further criminal activities. The Nigerian Inter-Faith Council had worked with all sides in the crisis to rebuild confidence and promote religious and ethnic harmony among the people.

Regarding human rights defenders, the Special Rapporteur’s work was noted but Nigeria had a problem with the conceptualization of her work, particularly with the definition of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals. Nigeria would like to protect every citizen’s rights and not have different layers of laws for human rights defenders in comparison to normal citizens. Nigeria had misgivings about the Special Rapporteur’s work on human rights defenders but remained open to a continuing dialogue with the Special Rapporteur.

BADRIDDIN OBIDOV (Uzbekistan) said concerning the report of the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders, Uzbekistan regularly provided updates and reports and the report did not reflect the real situation on the alleged issues. The Special Rapporteur should take a balanced approach and avoid selectivity in the preparation of documents. The substance on the report itself should not lack in-depth analysis of communication from States and Uzbekistan hoped that the Special Rapporteur would give in the future more space for identification of concrete and effective strategies to better fulfill major tasks in accordance with her mandate. Uzbekistan then updated the Special Rapporteur on steps taken in the country since her last report. In November 2010, the President of Uzbekistan presented the Concept of further deepening the democratic reforms in the country. One of the major six directions of this Concept was dedicated to establishing and developing civil society institutions. The past years were the time of dynamic formation and development of various institutions in civil society and non-state and non-profit organizations. At present, there were over 5,100 non-governmental organizations in Uzbekistan, functioning in various spheres of life.

AGUINALDO CRISTOVA (Angola) noted with dismay that most of the information contained in the report on human rights defenders in Angola was inaccurate and intentionally distorted. Angola recommended that the Special Rapporteur resort to more reliable sources for information and not only to the opposition political parties. With regard to the urgent appeal presented by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, the Angolan delegation wished to inform the Council that Mr. Belchior Lanso Tati, Mr. Francisco Luemba, Mr. Petro Fuca, Mr. Raul Tati, and Mr. Zeferino Puati had had a due process and had been acquitted by the Cabinda Provincial Court last year. Regarding the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, in 2007 the Special Rapporteur had visited Angola at the invitation of the Government. Some useful recommendations had come out of the report she produced and Angola was glad to inform the Council that most of them were in the process of implementation.

NUR KHOLIS, of Commission on Human Rights of Indonesia - Konnas Ham, said Komnas HAM welcomed the Special Rapporteur’s report on freedom of religion or belief. In the records of the Komnas HAM, from 2007 to 2010, the cases of intolerance and violence against religious freedom continued. The violence experienced by the Ahmadiyah congregation was an example which resulted in the death of three people and the injury of five others. The role of the government, especially the local government, could be part of the religious freedom problem because the police and government were unable to act decisively against acts of violence and destruction. As long as the government and police did not play a significant role as stakeholders of human rights protection and enforcement then religious freedom cases would be repeated in coming years.

KATHARINA ROSE, of International Coordinating Committee of National Human Rights Institutions, said that the International Coordinating Committee welcomed the focus on women human rights defenders in the report of the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders, which highlighted extraordinary risks they were confronted with as a result of this work. Those risks, which included gender-based forms of violence, affected not only defenders but often members of their families. Such was the case of Commissioner Hamadi Barmaki of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission who with her husband and four children had been killed by a suicide bomber in Kabul in January this year. Her death was a stark reminder of the situations in which many human rights defenders lived and worked. The International Coordinating Committee of National Human Rights Institutions strongly supported the Special Rapporteur’s conclusions and recommendations and echoed her calls to States to protect women human rights defenders from violations perpetrated by States and non-State actors; ensure that violations were promptly and impartially investigated and perpetrators punished in an appropriate manner; and ensure that programmes dedicated to the security and protection of human rights defenders integrated a gender perspective and addressed the specific risks and security needs of women defenders.

SARAH VADER, of Baha’i International Community, agreed with the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Dr. Bielefeldt, on the key role of the school environment, not only to promote understanding and tolerance, but also to nurture and develop a sense of commonality and belonging. They found his recommendations most pertinent to the creation of an environment where every child could exercise his or her freedom to believe, which, under international law, included the manifestation of that belief. In some countries, children faced discrimination because they belonged to religious minorities, because their faith was rejected and ostracized. With this in mind, they asked the Special Rapporteur what could be done when a State promoted curricula, textbooks and teaching methods that incited intolerance and discrimination against certain religion groups. They also asked the Special Rapporteur if it would not be appropriate to add to his list of recommendations a mechanism to address these cases, so that children belonging to religious minorities had somewhere to turn when their rights were grossly abused.

MICHAEL INEICHEN, of International Service for Human Rights, said the International Service for Human Rights welcomed the report of the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders. States should develop tailored means to address the needs of human rights defenders. The International Service for Human Rights welcomed the recognition of structural and systematic factors that impacted women and the higher risks facing women human rights defenders. They would like to know how the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders would continue building the gender perspective of the mandate. They encouraged all States to protect human rights defenders who engaged in the area of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex issues. However the Council heard renewed attempts to undermine the universality of human rights by stating that some social entities were not recognized by the United Nations system and the resistance by some States to accept and deal with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex violations. What did the Special Rapporteur plan to do with States that failed to protect human rights defenders, especially those that worked on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex issues?

GIANFRANCO FATTORINI, of Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples, in a joint statement, said that they were daily confronted with multiple discrimination, and one of the components was gender. The recommendations addressed to States by the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders were of cardinal importance as States were not only responsible for the protection of human rights defenders but were among the primary violators of their rights. Such was the case of Mohamed Sadig Kaboudvand, Kurdish human rights defenders in Iran, who was currently serving a ten-year prison sentence. The non-governmental organization asked the Special Rapporteur which concrete recommendations could be addressed to Iran concerning this case.

EMERLYNNE GILL, of Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development, said that the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development welcomed the report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, which expounded the challenges, risks and human rights violations faced by women human rights defenders and those working on women’s rights and gender issues. They were gravely concerned that human rights defenders in Asia commonly faced acts of harassment, especially by the judiciary, and criminalization of their work, particularly through the use of defamation laws, which were often abused to suppress their freedom of expression. The Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development welcomed that the Special Rapporteur was able to conduct a visit to India in January 2011. However, it was their deep regret that since the mission had taken place, there had been allegations of reprisals against those who engaged with the mandate. They would like to hear from the Special Rapporteur whether she had been in communication with the Indian authorities on such cases and the issue of reprisals during and after her country visit.

JOELLE FISS, of Human Rights First, in a joint statement with World Organization against Torture and International Federation of Human Rights Leagues (FIDH), said that Human Rights First had worked for many years to reverse the tide of hate crimes and religious and other forms of discrimination and had offered positive recommendations to governments to confront hatred while respecting the freedom of expression. Human Rights First had documented over 70 recent cases from 15 countries demonstrating how blasphemy laws were used to stifle discussion and dissent and settle private disputes. Human Rights First urged Council members to vote against any resolution which referred to defamation or denigration of religions and to focus instead on the implementation of existing obligations to combat discrimination and violence. Human Rights First called for an immediate and transparent investigation into the killing of David Kato, a Ugandan human rights defender working on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex issues, and encouraged the Special Rapporteur to visit Egypt and Tunisia during this crucial transitional phase and to provide technical assistance, including a gender dimension, to those countries which were in the process of drafting national protection measures such as Mexico and Brazil.

PAISARN LIKHITPREECHAKUL, of Front Line, the International Foundation for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, in a joint statement said that the report of the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders raised issues of seriousness of the violations against defenders of women’s rights and gender, particularly defenders of rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons. Those defenders were particularly at risk, but were often not recognised as human rights defenders entitled to support and protection. Bringing to attention the role of non-state actors as perpetrators by the Special Rapporteur was commendable, as in many instances they acted in complicity with the State. Little progress had been made in developing appropriate mechanisms on reprisals and Front Line wished to know how the Special Rapporteur proposed to address this and to hasten the process of putting in place a mechanism to address reprisals against human rights defenders engaging with the United Nations system.

LAURENCE KWARK, of Pax Romana, said Pax Romana commended the work of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief. The Rapporteur had described very well the way in which stereotypes against minorities provided fruitful ground to a climate of intolerance which led to acts of violence. There was no neutral point of view able to rise in a society and it was important to give representatives of religious minorities the opportunity to speak and participate in a debate on an equal footing. The participation of minorities without discrimination had to be guaranteed in all places. The international community had to defend the rights of women rights defender to express their opinions and State authorities had an enormous responsibility when it came to defend the freedom of religion and had to guarantee the protection and freedom of those who participated in the debate.

SLAVA MAMEDOV, of CIVICUS - World Alliance for Citizen Participation, said that CIVICUS would like to highlight the sections in the report on human rights defenders concerning Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Torture continued to be a common practice in the penal systems of these countries. People linked with the Andijan events of 2005, including innocent family members, were routinely detained and subjected to long years of bodily torture and psychological terror and would note that medical personnel often played a role in concealing evidence and fabricating fake documents which made filing charges impossible. CIVICUS called on the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders to make an urgent appeal, in cooperation with her colleagues, the Special Rapporteur on torture, and the Working Groups on arbitrary detention and involuntary disappearances to Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan to grant a visit to their countries.

Concluding Remarks

MARGARET SEKAGGYA, Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders, in her concluding observations, said there was no need to exhaust local remedies in order to address the violence against human rights defenders. The Special Rapporteur appealed to States to make more responses to her communications in order to clarify what the situation on the ground was. The Special Rapporteur commended Armenia for the positive steps taken in implementing recommendations and encouraged it to respond to the remaining communications. Concerning the profiles and definitions of human rights defenders, the Special Rapporteur said that at this particular moment the Council was talking about their protection, on local and national levels, and on decriminalisation of their work. That was why the Special Rapporteur recommended that States not go into too many details in trying to define their profiles and work, but to focus on issues at hand. Turning to the questions on best practices concerning the protection of human rights defenders, the Special Rapporteur noted that those included consultation with human rights defenders, the acknowledgement of the important role defenders played, training of State officials, the fight against impunity by State authorities, and to impose adequate sanctions on perpetrators and redress to victims. The overall best practices had been given in the report and included deepening democracy, fighting for social and environmental justice for all, striving for equality and upholding of the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

HEINER BIELEFELDT, Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, in his concluding remarks, thanked those who expressed their support for his mandate. He said a lot of the questions and comments were concentrated on the issue of diversity which was not the starting human rights principle. The starting principle was, instead, the dignity of human beings. The international community had to accommodate a broad range of diversity activities as an expression of human freedom. Regarding the issue of accommodating this diversity in textbooks or materials for education purposes, consultation processes with the various belief groups should be involved so that they had the chance to present their understanding. This understanding of diversity and freedom contained a challenge on interreligious communications and the international community needed to find a way beyond the traditional inter-religious communication that gave place for marginalized groups and it was important to conduct this on a grass rout level. In addition, Mr. Bielefeldt, pointed out that the international community could not confine the problem of violence only to terrorism and many religious minorities had structural reasons, such as structural discriminations. An analysis of the root cause of violence was the first step and then it was important to focus on the prohibition of the incitement to violence. Furthermore, regarding women’s rights the Special Rapporteur said that freedom of religion or belief was a human right and the international community had to try to find synergies and broaden the picture of religion as a social reality, not only theological, and encompassed the role played by women. Parents were rights’ holders but also duty bearers in the context of freedom of religion or belief and in religious education. Neutrality was also a concept mentioned and a meaningful understanding of neutrality meant fairness presence of religious principles. In underling the challenges ahead, the Special Rapporteur indicated the inter-religious communications; the need to develop more creativity and structural reasons of violence; and the inter-relation of freedom of religious or belief with other human rights.

Documentation

The Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights: Compilation of United Nations manuals, guides, training material and other tools on minority issues, (A/HRC/16/29), is submitted pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 13/12 of 25 March 2010 which requested the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a compilation of United Nations’ manuals, guides, training material and other tools dealing with minority issues. Various United Nations entities have published methodological material which can provide useful guidance in the promotion and protection of the rights of minorities. This report provides summaries of the essential contents of such material.

The Thematic Study by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the role of international cooperation in support of national efforts for the realization of the rights of persons with disabilities, (A/HRC/16/38), focuses on the role of international cooperation in realizing the rights of persons with disabilities. It analyzes international cooperation under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, sets out examples of international cooperation involving States, international and regional organizations and civil society organizations and identifies challenges to international cooperation.

The Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, (A/HRC/16/39), provides a summary of the main developments in the work of United Nations human rights bodies and mechanisms and of the activities undertaken by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, at Headquarters and in the field, that contribute to the promotion and implementation of rights provided for under the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities.

The Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, (A/HRC/16/50), highlights recent developments including the reaffirmation by the General Assembly of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, activities of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1373 (2001) concerning counter-terrorism (Counter-Terrorism Committee) and its Executive Directorate, and other developments related to the regulation of private military and security companies.

The Report of the High Commissioner: Summary of the full day meeting on the rights of the child, (A/HRC/16/55), is submitted pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 13/20 of 26 March 2010 on the rights of the child, in which the Council requested the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a summary of the full-day meeting on the rights of the child, as a follow-up to paragraph 7 of Council resolution 7/29 of 28 March 2008. The report contains a summary of the discussions held on 10 March 2010 during the annual full day of discussion on the fight against sexual violence against children.

The Report of the Secretary-General: Analytical Study on the steps taken to Promote and Implement programmes to address HIV/AIDS-related human rights, (A/HRC/16/69), reports some success in strengthening human rights elements of national HIV responses, but also many deep and politically difficult challenges yet to be overcome. Protection from HIV-related discrimination is embodied in national AIDS strategies and national laws, but discrimination remains widespread in many sectors of society. Discrimination is linked closely to HIV-related stigma, which is in turn linked to both fear and ignorance regarding modes of transmission of HIV and to association of HIV with behaviours that are criminalized or considered “immoral”. There is increasing knowledge of programmes that can work to reduce HIV-related stigma, however such programmes are often not funded or implemented at a scale necessary to make a significant difference.

General Debate on the Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Including the Right to Development

ANDRAS DEKANY (Hungary), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the European Union was founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights represented a broader consensus on human dignity than did any single culture and tradition. Regional, cultural, social, religious or other particularities could not be invoked to justify violations of international human rights. One of the biggest achievements of this age was information technology and the recent and ongoing social revolutions in North Africa and States in the Gulf clearly demonstrated the importance of Internet freedom and the tremendous potential that new technologies had in the advancement of freedom of expression and information.

The European Union was willing to support and complement the early warning and early action efforts of international entities, including the recently established United Nations Joint Office on the Prevention of Genocide and the Promotion of the Responsibility to Protect, and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, to address genocides and other mass atrocities in a timely manner. The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the right to change it, and the right to hold opinions without interference were universal human rights which should be protected. In many countries, half the population, mainly women, was discriminated against and the European Union welcomed the establishment of the United Nations Women. The protection and promotion of the rights of the child was another priority for the European Union which was proud to run a joint initiative with the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries in this field. Numerous persons were subjected to human rights violations and discrimination due to their sexual orientation or gender identity and the European Union supported all the efforts undertaken by governments to promote equal rights and opportunities regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.

OSITADINMA ANAEDU (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said the African Group welcomed the level of analysis that went into the study on the role of international cooperation under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The United Nations estimated that over 500 million persons with disabilities lived in less developed countries and this number was increasing every day due to factors such as war and destruction and others. The majority of persons with disabilities in the world lived in less developed countries where people lacked access to health care and where the risk of impairment was greater for a family that lived in poverty. It was necessary to enhance international cooperation to develop policies to protect persons with disabilities. The African Group agreed that disproportionate representation of persons with disabilities among the poor and a failure to mainstream the rights of this category could diminish the likelihood of meeting international development goals such as the Millennium Development Goals. There was a need to refocus international cooperation towards other possible areas of cooperation such as research, technology transfer and humanitarian assistance. Turning to the report of the High Commissioner on the protection of human rights while countering terrorism, the African Group said that while recognising immense persistent challenges faced by Member States in combating terrorism and safeguarding the security of individuals within their jurisdiction, the African Group shared the High Commissioner’s concerns over the erosion of respect for due process, including the right to a fair trial.

CHRISTIAN GUILLERMET-FERNANDEZ (Costa Rica), speaking on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries (GRULAC), said GRULAC reiterated the importance attached to the promotion and protection of human rights. GRULAC countries promoted the social development of women and their participation in society. One demonstration of this was the initiative taken by GRULAC on the annual debate on the rights of women and the support of the action of the United Nations Gender Equality Office and the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women to ensure that the rights of women were included comprehensively in the United Nations. GRULAC was proud to be the region with the highest ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the protection of this convention represented a challenge that they took with conviction. International cooperation in support of national efforts ensured a viable transition in a society of inclusion. Respect for linguistic minorities and the principle of non-discrimination were promoted in their region and they believed that protection had to be extended to religious minorities. GRULAC urged States to guarantee under their jurisdictions that persons belonging to minorities could ensure their rights and they looked for the creation of a proper environment promoting the rights of minorities and their achievements.

PABLO GOMEZ DE OLEA BUSTINZA (Spain) said that Spain was aware of the responsibility of the State to reaffirm human rights and the Government was convinced that there was no hierarchy to rights, that all were equal. This was demonstrated and reaffirmed by Spain’s commitment to the provision of basic fundamental rights as evidenced in the work it had done with other governments on securing drinking water and basic sanitation. Spain would continue to combat terrorism and the Government believed that the right of the victims of terrorism should also be considered. It would be presenting a panel during this session of the Council considering the obligations of States to victims of terrorism. Spain welcomed the establishment of a new Working Group on discrimination against women in legislation. Spain’s Government did not accept human rights violations based on sexual orientation and it had made a priority the decriminalization of sex between people of the same gender and it would continue to support the rights of those in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex communities. The elimination of discrimination and intolerance required a global approach and Spain noted the initiative of the Alliance of Civilizations in this area.

The Representative of Pakistan said that the right to self-determination was the raison d’etre of the contemporary international order. Its universal acceptance had made it a fundamental right of the United Nations system and it was well established in its core instruments including the Charter of the United Nations. The breach of an obligation arising out of recognition of the right of peoples to self-determination constituted an international crime that gave rise to international responsibility. This Council had a responsibility to actively pursue this fundamental collective human right of peoples and should focus its attention to the denial of the basic right to self-determination to the people of Occupied Jammu and Kashmir. The United Nations had determined 60 years ago that the Kashmiris had the right to self-determination and had set up the plan for the realisation of this right. However, six decades later, this plan had not been implementation and the Kashmiris right to self-determination had not been realised. The dispute over Kashmir would not be resolved without the realisation of the right to self-determination of the Kashmiri people in keeping with the resolutions of the United Nations.

DOUGLAS M. GRIFFITHS (United States) said that the United States watched with eager optimism the revolts in North Africa. Free and fair elections were essential to maintain democracy and the right to vote was important. Human rights and fundamental freedoms were interconnected to democracy and civil and political rights were particularly important in the context of genuine elections. The freedom of association, including the right to freedom to demonstrate were universal values strictly tied to democracy and free elections. The United States called upon the Council to pay attention to the rights of the citizens in the context of elections and to be the voice of the voiceless.

RODOLFO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said Cuba had concerns to share and proposals to make. The major concerns in the world included the increase in hunger, the use of cereals in industrialized countries for bio fuels and the impact of climate change which would lead to people becoming stateless as their land sank away. Cuba would address its message to this Council through the injustice of five Cuban citizens who have been detained in the United States. Why was terrorism allowed by the powerful, whereas the victims of terrorist acts had no ability to exercise defense? Cuba would continue to appeal for decency and for the release of these Cuban citizens.

HELGA FASTRUP ERVIK (Norway) said that the rapid unfolding of the new era in the Middle East and North Africa demonstrated the significant role played by the new media as a vehicle of societal change and for popular mobilisation for the demand for greater rights. At the same time, governments tightened restrictions on communications as a means to suppress national dialogue and dissent. The continuing deterioration of the freedom of the media in several countries was a matter of great concern. Journalists were subject to violent attacks or killings, arbitrary detention and the closure of independent newspapers. Safety and the free work of journalists remained major issues that needed to be jointly addressed. Many journalists were seen as human rights defenders when addressing human rights issues in their work. Curbing their work might have serious consequences for the implementation of human rights as a whole. Laws and restrictions to curb cyber crime were needed but law should never be used contrary to the international human rights norms. Norway was very concerned about the increasing tendency to use national security and other laws to curtail the enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression, the right to freedom of assembly and other human rights.

REMIGIUSZ A. HENCZEL (Poland) said Poland underlined the importance of the freedom of expression and opinion, freedom of association and assembly and the right to free and fair elections. These were the fundamental rights that the international community considered to be one of the biggest achievements of modern democracies. Though their implementation in many regions had advanced in recent years, there were still many countries where the human rights situation remained very disturbing and citizens were denied their civil liberties. The role of democracy at best assured that civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights applied in every country in the world. Though democratic systems varied in forms and shape, democracy had evolved into a universal value. Poland attached great importance to the protection of the rights and freedoms of persons belonging to various minorities. Poland was concerned by restrictions on the freedom of religion and belief that individuals were facing in different parts of the world. The widespread climate of intolerance often led to intimidation and violence against religious minorities and sometimes even to assassinations and deaths of innocents. Poland urged all authorities to provide persons belonging to religious minorities with the proper protection.

CHEIKH TIDIANE SAMBA (Senegal) said Senegal would like to dwell on the situation of people living with a disability. The role of international cooperation in achieving the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was indispensible. The African Union had decreed the decade for persons with disabilities from 1999 to 2009 which was to be extended until 2019. It would be important to see how the Council could ensure follow up of article 32 of the Convention. Civil society played a key role in removing the obstacles or blocks to the participation of persons with disabilities in society. Senegal had adopted the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2010.

MOHAMMED SALIM SAMAR (Algeria) said that Algeria attached the greatest importance to the right to peace and supported opinions that called to linking of this right to other human rights, at the time when the international community was commemorating the resolution 15/14 that had opened the way to the right to self-determination. It was up to the Council to reaffirm the importance of this right. Algeria had constantly upheld this inalienable right that lay at the collective memory of Algerian people. Had the time now come for the Council to assess the level of the right to self-determination by autonomous provinces and territories, Algeria asked?

URSKA CAS SVETEK (Slovenia) said that all human rights were universal, indivisible and interrelated. Slovenia welcomed the progressive approach of the Human Rights Council demonstrated in the past year, among others, making concrete steps towards the adoption of the Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training. In Slovenia’s view the Declaration was an important document defining the importance of knowing one’s rights and the rights of others, the importance of awareness raising, and the universality, indivisibility, interdependence, and interrelatedness of all rights. Numerous natural disasters and the global impact of climate change witnessed in the past years had also put the limelight on the relations between human rights and environment, an aspect not yet explored profoundly. Therefore, Slovenia was pleased to present, together with other members of the core group on the issue, a resolution which requested the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights to conduct a detailed analytical study on the relationship between human rights and the environment. Slovenia invited all States to support endeavors in this regard.

HASSANE BOUKILI (Morocco) said the progress made by States in implementing their obligations to the protection of human rights was critical. The regional context for Arab countries, where young people constituted more than 60 per cent of the population, posed a challenge for the leaders who emerged out of the cold war and colonialism and to which the young population no longer identified. The promotion of human rights included a tangible commitment to democratic reforms. Since the 1990’s, Morocco had initiated gradual structural and deep seated reforms, including the review of the constitution, the promotion of local cultures, the establishment of new human rights structures, the National Human Rights Council, and the Ombudsman which were all in full accord with international standards. Since 2000 Morocco had decentralized to the local level to provide for more regional participation in the political process. Morocco had gone through an historic stage with these comprehensive reforms, drawing on plurality, a state ruled by law and better exercise of power in the Parliament.

MOHAMMAD ZAREIAN (Iran) said that more needed to be done on the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Right to Development, including the drafting of an international legally binding instrument. Hard-won development gains had been reversed as a result of multiple crises of the last few years, including global food, global economic and financial crises and the ensuing recession. Hence there was an urgent need for a structured and multidisciplinary dialogue on an ongoing basis between Member States, United Nations agencies and the financial and developmental institutions to find ways and means to further implement the right to development. Realization of this right called for the responsibility and accountability of all to create a fair and conducive international economic environment. The current international order was not only obstructing the economic and social welfare of developing countries but it also exacerbated poverty and despair, so contributing to the emergence of violence and political instability. The detrimental impacts of unilateral and multilateral sanctions on nations, especially in developing countries, created grave concerns for food security, adequate housing, and other essential human rights, including the right to development.

JONAS RUDALEVICIUS (Lithuania), speaking on behalf of the Convening Group of the Community of Democracies, said that the discussion under the present agenda item allowed the Council once again to look at the whole scope of different human rights as well as to emphasize their interdependence and interrelatedness. While dealing with particular human rights issues the international community remained mindful that they were elements of the overall structure of the human rights system. States had the duty to fulfill their obligations to promote universal respect for and observance and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all. The Community of Democracies welcomed possibilities for discussions on various human rights elements during interactive debates with the Special Procedures. These discussions went from economic, social and cultural rights to civil and political rights, from rights of specific groups and individuals to interrelations between human rights and other thematic issues. In particular, the Community of Democracies wanted to welcome the attention at this discussion given to the rights of the child and to holding once again the annual full-day meeting devoted to these rights.

ABSALOM NGHIFITIKEKO (Namibia) said that the issues raised by the Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing in post conflict situations applied to Namibia which, post independence, found itself in a precarious situation as most of the land was owned by people who had come to colonise the country. In a spirit of national reconciliation and democracy, the Government had embarked on initiatives to acquire land for resettlement and to build livelihoods through the willing buyer, willing seller policy. Raising the standard of living for the population and providing adequate housing was a part of the development agenda of the Government as set out in Namibia’s Vision 2030. Regarding the political violence in Côte d’Ivoire and in North Africa, Namibia called for restraint by all parties from violence and urged for peaceful solutions. The Government would continue to work with the international community in promoting and protecting the rights of the child.

CHRISTIAN GUILLERMET-FERNANDEZ (Costa Rica) said that the entire work of this Council should be focused on the protection of victims without any distinction. Costa Rica had always been a champion of international instruments for the prevention of torture and had a positive impression of the work that had been done, in particular the paradigm shift of leaving repressive approach behind to focus on what could be done in the future. On the right to development, Costa Rica said that the approach in the report and the Working Group on the right to development presented an impasse which had become too entrenched. There was the need to focus on those most vulnerable and most in need and Costa Rica invited States to focus on the substance which was the development of the countries.

STEFANO NOBILE, of Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, welcomed the report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and appreciated the human rights based approach of its recommendations. Today’s world witnessed a massive display of religious intolerance that, with different expressions and in different social-political context, undermined peaceful coexistence and prevented progress and the building of stable peace. At present, Christians were the religious group which suffered most from persecution because of their faith. Followers of other religious or belief equally suffered intolerance and discrimination. Freedom of religion or belief was a fundamental human rights enshrined in a number of international treaties and declarations. When religious freedom was acknowledged, the dignity of the human person was respected at its root; on the other hand, whenever religious freedom was denied, human dignity was offended, with a resulting threat to justice and peace.

SIDAHMED ASFARI, of France Libertés – Fondation Danielle Mitterrand, said that since 1975 the Moroccans in the Western Sahara had been suffering violations of their rights. A large number of reports had revealed violations such as enforced disappearances, executions, extrajudicial executions and families that could not find the bodies of their family members. Many people had engaged in demonstrations to ask for their rights and in November 2010 there was violence against individuals and children and 20 human rights defenders were placed in prison. France Libertes wished to remind the United Nations that it was responsible for the administration of this region.

__________

For use of the information media; not an official record