Human Rights Council continues general debate on human rights situations requiring its attention

AFTERNOON

The Human Rights Council this afternoon continued its general debate on human rights situations requiring the Council’s attention.
 
In the general debate, speakers raised allegations of human rights violations in countries and regions around the world and reiterated the Council’s responsibility to address all situations of concern.
 
The following delegations took the floor in the general debate: Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, Russia on behalf of a group of States, Belgium on behalf of a group of States, Japan, Iraq, Georgia, Netherlands, Belgium, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Canada, Spain, and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
 
Speaking in right of reply were Morocco, Syria, Sudan, Venezuela, Uzbekistan, Zimbabwe, Egypt, Sri Lanka, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Turkmenistan, Algeria and Qatar.
 
The general debate on human rights situations that require the attention of the Council started on 19 June and a summary of the first part can be seen
here.
 
The Human Rights Council will resume its work on Monday, 23 June, at 9 a.m., to continue its general debate on human rights situation requiring the Council’s attention.  It will then hear presentations of the reports of the Advisory Committee, the Social Forum, the Forum on Human Rights and Business and the Working Group on the Rights of Peasants, followed by a general debate on human rights bodies and mechanisms.
 
Human Rights Situations that Require the Council’s Attention
 
Iran, speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, reaffirmed the need to defend the principles of non-selectivity, non-politicization, and impartiality in the consideration of human rights situations in the Council, as well as to ensure that human rights were not used for political purposes.  The Non-Aligned Movement expressed its deep concern over the continuation and proliferation of the practice of selective adoption of country-specific resolutions in the Human Rights Council, which exploited human rights for political purposes. 
 
Russia, speaking on behalf of a group of States, expressed great alarm at continuing fighting in Syria, with devastating human rights implications and an increased number of internally displaced persons and influx of refugees to neighbouring countries.  Recent ceasefire agreements had saved lives and facilitated the delivery of humanitarian assistance to civilians.  The proliferation of ceasefire agreements was one of the most effective ways to secure access to basic human rights.
 
Belgium, speaking on behalf of a group of States, expressed concern about the serious deterioration of the human rights situation in South Sudan since mid-December 2013.  The massive and systematic human rights violations and abuses of international humanitarian law committed by all parties to the conflict were strongly condemned.  The expressed appreciation and support for ongoing regional efforts to put the crisis to an end.  Perpetrators had to be held accountable.  Thorough, regular and long-term monitoring and reporting were needed.
 
Japan said that it was vital that the international community worked as a whole to address the situation in Iraq and neighbouring countries.  A political solution was required for Syria.  The heinous acts of terrorism in Nigeria and the mass abduction of the school girls were condemned.  Japan had decided to provide assistance of $ 855,000 in response to the incident.  Concern about the situation in South Sudan was also expressed, particularly about the large numbers of internally displaced persons and refugees in neighbouring countries. 
 
Iraq stated that some groups in Iraq were trying to create a state of terror, including through killings, evictions, kidnappings and arson.  Iraq was capable of overcoming the current crisis through military and security measures and political dealings.  This was a battle by the State against terrorism and extremism.  The basic battle that the Iraqi authorities were waging was to liberate the areas occupied by the terrorists.
 
Georgia expressed its concern over the so-called parliamentary elections held in the Tskhinvali region.  That illegal act was yet another futile attempt to disguise the consequences of the ethnic cleansing.  The Russian occupation forces had resumed the installation of barb wire fences and other artificial obstacles across the occupation lines.  There was an urgent necessity to establish international monitoring mechanisms therein. 
 
Netherlands remained concerned about the humanitarian situation in Myanmar and stressed the life-saving role of the international organizations present in the country.  Those organizations should be granted unrestricted access throughout the country.  The Netherlands was also very concerned over the crisis in Syria, where the situation was ever worsening.  All the perpetrators had to be held accountable.  The case of Miriam Ibrahim in Sudan was particularly worrying.
 
Belgium was concerned about the situation of human rights in Burundi, where many civil liberties were curtailed in the crucial pre-election period.  A further deterioration of situation was seen in Azerbaijan, which should respect its international obligations.  Russia was called to open a direct dialogue with civil society and eliminate ever-increasing restrictions on its activities.
 
Belarus was seeing the work of the Human Rights Council become increasingly politicized and considerably unbalanced.  Virtually all of the human rights violations in so-called established democracies were not addressed and resources were being used for gross interference into the internal affairs of other States.  Belarus expressed serious concern about the rise of a right wing and nationalist mood prevailing in the European Union, as could be seen in the recent elections. 
 
Azerbaijan drew the attention of the Council to the dire results of the military aggression of Armenia against Azerbaijan.  It was a well-known fact that the armed aggression by Armenia against the ancestral land of Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh, had led to the occupation of almost one fifth of the territory of Azerbaijan and a flood of internally displaced persons.  Azerbaijan was still making strenuous efforts to ensure better living conditions for this desperate population. 
 
Canada said the people of Iran still lacked the most basic freedoms and protection, and promises had not been fulfilled, leaving Iranians disappointed and disillusioned.  Political prisoners were beaten, lawyers imprisoned, and there was also a continued excessive application of the death penalty.  Canada was profoundly troubled by systematic and ongoing violations of human rights and would continue to hold Iran accountable for these egregious human rights violations.  
 
Spain expressed concern at the intensity of the crisis in South Sudan.  This was intolerable.  The Council had to grapple with the crisis in a firmer fashion.  Human rights violations in the Central African Republic continued to be atrocious and there was a total lack of State authority.  The situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was of particular concern because of the impact on women and children.  In Syria, the human rights violations and violations of international humanitarian law proliferated, threatening to over-spill in the region. 
 
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said that the United States and other countries which pretended to judge human rights had been waging wars under the pretext of combating terrorism, ignoring the human rights violations for which they themselves were responsible.  The delegation was also deeply concerned that Japan was attempting to evade its historical responsibility for past crimes against humanity and urged the Republic of Korea to abolish the security law and take action to fulfil its human rights obligations.  The delegation also urged States seeking to change the socio-economic system of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to mind their own business.
 
Right of Reply
 
Morocco, speaking in a right of reply, regretted that Algeria continued to refuse access to the territory to investigate human rights violations.  Very few Special Procedure mandate holders had been able to travel to Algeria and several non-governmental organizations had called on Algeria to stop human rights violations committed on its territory.  Despite the condemnation, Algeria was avoiding to take measures to comply with its obligations.
 
Syria, speaking in a right of reply concerning the Da Silva report, said that history was full of similar reports that had destroyed countries and had subsequently been regretted.  Some countries believed that their money was capable of buying the conscience of the whole world.  Among those criticising Syria, some did not even have elections in their countries and were supporters of terrorism.  Since coming to the Council, the United States had only politicised human rights, and from Britain and France, Syria only expected a colonial inheritance and mentality. 
 
Sudan, speaking in a right of reply, responded to the statements made by the European Union and the United Kingdom regarding the case of Miriam Ibrahim.  The issue had been spinned by the international mass media, which had created a number of false allegations.  The chance of review was still there.  There was no room for an intervention in the Sudanese judicial system, and the judges should be left to do their job independently.
 
Venezuela, speaking in a right of reply, said that the United States was using all available means to spread the impression that Venezuela was in a state of chaos.  There had been several terrorist groups which had tried to undermine the robust democracy, backed by people in numerous elections over the previous 15 years.  The United States, an expert of criminal invasions, had no right to stand as a defender of human rights.
 
Uzbekistan, speaking in a right of reply, denounced as lies the claims made by the United States concerning the situation of human rights in Uzbekistan.  Uzbekistan respected human rights: the numbers of detained persons in the country had decreased and there were no political prisoners, only those who had broken the law.  Uzbekistan drew attention to violations of human rights in the United States, in particular against migrants and indigenous peoples. 
 
Zimbabwe, speaking in a right of reply, rejected as totally unwarranted the allegations of intimidation, torture and harassment of its people and was unaware of any cases of ill treatment described by the United States.  The national law spelled out how aggrieved persons could seek redress.  The only cases of harassment were those that were the consequences of the illegal sanctions imposed by the United States which had violated the human rights of the Zimbabweans for a decade.
 
Egypt, speaking in a right of reply, said that detention in Egypt was carried out on the basis of evidence and through a legal process and with respect for due process and the right to free trial.  The judicial system in Egypt was known for its integrity and independence.  Egypt fully respected its obligations under international human rights law to respect the right to freedom of expression and of opinion and the 2014 Constitution guaranteed the protection of this right, with the exception of cases of incitement to hatred and discrimination among citizens.
 
Sri Lanka, speaking in a right of reply, placed on record the sequence of events that led to incidents of communal violence in Southern Sri Lanka on 15 and 16 June in which three people lost their lives due to violence.  Parallel investigations into the incident had been ordered and over 40 persons had been arrested.  All those indulging in hate speech would be taken in for questioning and Sri Lanka assured the Human Rights Council that it remained deeply committed to the protection of all its citizens and places of worship.
 
Saudi Arabia, speaking in a right of reply, responded to Norway by saying that it should not be concerned at all.  Saudi Arabia abided by its international human rights obligations.  Everyone had rights and obligations and the judiciary in Saudi Arabia was based on Sharia law which guaranteed everyone’s rights and freedoms as long as they did not infringe upon others.  The regime of Bashar Al-Assad was committing atrocities against its own population and the Security Council  should refer the situation to the International Criminal Court.
 
Thailand, speaking in a right of reply in response to Norway and Germany and concerns about the current situation, said Thailand had no intention of retreating from democracy.  Before the army assumed power, the country had been paralysed under a vacuum of power that could have led to the polarisation of the crisis.  The army hoped to restore order and stability so that country could move again.  Only some restrictions had been imposed on freedom of expression, to prevent hate speech, and the media, including the international media, had been allowed to visit and witness the events. 
 
Cuba, speaking in a right of reply, said that the United States was in no position to criticise other countries.  What credibility did this country have while it was using drones to assassinate hundreds of persons and declaring that these extra-judicial executions were legal?  Cuba, Latin America, the Caribbean and the world would never forget that it was the United States Government that continued to protect terrorists, such as Luis Posada Carriles.  Cuba called for putting an end to hypocrisy and lies.
 
Turkmenistan, speaking in a right of reply in response to the statement made yesterday by the United States, assured that its Government had taken concrete measures to put the penitentiary system in conformity with international standards.  It had also revised its law on the media and professional activity of the press.
 
Algeria, speaking in a right of reply, said concerning Morocco’s diversions on the question of the Western Sahara, Morocco wanted to make everyone believe it was persecuted by Algeria and that it was the victim of a plot.  Morocco was illegally occupying the territory.  If Morocco was so convinced of its right to the Western Sahara, why not let the Sahrawis exercise their right to self-determination?
 
Qatar, speaking in a right of reply, said that terrorism was personified by the Government of Syria, which had killed more than 260,000 persons.  The Human Rights Council should not be a platform to spread lies.
 
Morocco, speaking in a second right of reply, said that the international community fully understood the situation in Algeria and stressed that Algeria must respect the right to self-determination of the Sahrawi people.  The suffering of the people in Tinduf was on the increase and Algeria was not delivering on its responsibility to protect them.  When the people of Tinduf engaged in the exercise of their right to self-determination, they became targets for the Algerian armed forces.
 
Saudi Arabia, speaking in a second right of reply, condemned terrorist attacks against Syria and asked the Human Rights Council not to ignore and neglect the worst form of terrorism that the Syrian regime perpetrated against its own people.  Saudi Arabia recalled the danger posed by the groups which carried out those terrorist attacks not only in the region but globally.  The world should hold Bashar Al-Assad accountable for terrorism against his own people.
 
Algeria, speaking in a second right of reply, said that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was present in the Tinduf camp and had never mentioned human rights violations as those claimed by Morocco.  Algeria recalled the 2013 report on exhumation of mass graves in Morocco, and said that the United Nations continued to receive reports of violations of human rights in Morocco, the practice of torture, denial of due process and others.
 
Syria, speaking in a second right of reply, responded to Saudi Arabia by saying that a culture of dialogue did not exist in that country.  The conditions faced by the Syrian people were the result of countries trying to distort the situation and Saudi Arabia was trying to undermine the image of Syria.  The Government should focus on the activities of the Saudi people rather than trying to discredit Syria. 
 
Qatar, speaking in a second right of reply in response to the statement by the Syrian delegation, said it would be the Syrian people who eventually held the Government accountable when they achieved their victory.  The Syrian Government should prepare for that day.
 __________

For use of the information media; not an official record