Default title

26 April 2002



Address by

Mary Robinson

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

at the Closing of the 58th Session

of the Commission on Human Rights





Mr. Chairman,
Distinguished Delegates,
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen;

This session of the Commission on Human Rights will call for deep reflection by all of us. I am convinced that everyone in this room wishes the human rights idea to triumph nationally, regionally, and internationally. How we are to achieve this is a topic that excites great passions and gives rise to agreement as well as divisions among us. Surely we agree that every effort must be made to spread a universal culture of human rights and to act to protect the victims of violations in any part of the world. That has been the policy of this Commission over the past fifty-eight sessions, and it must remain its bedrock in the future. If the Commission is not able to act for the protection of those whose rights are being violated on a massive scale, it would lose its essence.

In the aftermath of September 11th, and with acute conflict and tensions in some parts of the world, we were all conscious that this could be a difficult session. But, none of us could have envisaged that it would be as difficult organizationally as it proved to be. Following the cancellation of evening and night meetings, the Commission had to make drastic adjustments in its work. The Bureau had to meet on innumerable occasions, and the Chairman was called upon to guide the session in the face of these severe organizational difficulties.

I should like to pay tribute to you, Mr. Chairman, for the wisdom and patience you demonstrated in bringing us towards a successful conclusion of the session. I should also like to pay tribute to the Members of the Expanded Bureau who had to face such unprecedented organizational difficulties due to lack of meeting services. And I am proud of the way my own team coped at every level. It is my strong hope that such a situation will not be repeated in the future and that we can return to a Commission on Human Rights in which the voices of the rapporteurs, the voices of national institutions, and the voices of non-governmental organizations will be heard in fair and full measure – for they are strong voices for human rights protection.

I want to encourage reflection on how this shock to the Commission’s working methods points to the need to re-evaluate the essential contribution this Commission makes in giving leadership in human rights. The rapporteurs and experts will be reflecting on all of this at their annual meeting in June this year, and the non-governmental organizations will also be discussing their experience at this year’s Commission on Human Rights. I, for my part, pledge to work closely with the Chairperson and the Bureau over the coming months and to encourage this process of reflection.

In addition to organizational difficulties, the Commission had to cope with acute substantive and procedural difficulties due to the worsening situation in the occupied Palestinian territories and in Israel. This was the first shadow darkening the human rights’ horizon which Secretary-General Kofi Annan identified when he addressed the Commission. The Commission recognized the need to respond to the severe loss of life of both Palestinians and Israelis, and to the spiraling violence that raised fundamental challenges for the observance of international human rights and humanitarian law. The Commission reviewed the situation, called for a Visiting Mission, called for and received a fact-finding report, and kept the situation under review. The steps taken by the Commission stem from its commitment to protect victims of violations of human rights in a particularly difficult context.

The second shadow was the terrorist attacks of 11 September and what has happened in their aftermath. A number of strong statements during this session have affirmed the importance of upholding fully human rights and humanitarian law standards in combating terrorism. Again, my Office is ready to respond in support of any initiative the Commission may think appropriate in order to signal clearly that human rights should not be sacrificed in the fight against terrorism.

When I said at the outset that this session of the Commission will call for deep reflection, I had in mind also the divisive debates and votes that have taken place with regard to situations where it was alleged that gross violations of human rights were occurring. Let me say it openly: I hear distress and concern voiced by the human rights movement over allegations of increased politicization of issues in the Commission to the detriment of true human rights concerns. This is a time to remind ourselves of the essential role of the Commission on Human Rights in protecting human beings against gross violations through highlighting and publicizing those violations; providing a forum for victims to raise their grievances and to see their issues addressed; heeding the voice of conscience from different parts of the world; enabling NGOs to put alternative views and perspectives from governments; developing norms and standards; and continuing the ‘building blocks’ protection role of the Commission. From this perspective, it is vital that special rapporteurs, representatives of national human rights institutions, and non-governmental organizations are able and encouraged to undertake a dialogue with the Commission. The Commission needs to hear from them.

In the mid-1960s, as the newly-independent countries entered the United Nations, they were the ones who pressed the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, and this Commission to deal with situations of gross violations of human rights. Developing countries led efforts for the adoption of resolution No.8 of the 23rd session of the Commission, which remains the policy framework whereby this body engages in an annual review of situations where gross violations of human rights are allegedly taking place and takes appropriate actions for the protection of victims.

We have heard at this session the voices of some of those very developing countries arguing that there is too much criticism of them. I feel it my duty as High Commissioner to pose this question: is it not right that when there are situations of gross violations of human rights, this Commission seeks to protect the victims? And if it is felt that the existing methods are not adequate, is there not a responsibility on the membership of this Commission to consult and to find adequate ways of helping to protect the victims of such violations? A recent report of an international commission articulated the duty of the international community to come to the protection of those whose rights are being grievously violated. They highlighted the ‘responsibility to protect’. Today, in this Commission, I ask the question: How will the Commission on Human Rights, the central human rights body in the United Nations, continue to discharge this duty of protection?

We need to bear in mind that we might have reached a stage where the very success in highlighting and mainstreaming human rights issues in a more effective way could be in danger of provoking a reaction. I am particularly worried about a possible trend seeking to weaken the protection role that this Commission has been exercising. One could see this in the voting on country situations, where there has been, at this session, a preference for an approach excluding action if consensus was not possible. The core role of the Commission in protecting human rights through drawing attention to violations and abuses must be retained. But it is clear that in the future it needs to be matched by a much more significant commitment to provide resources for technical cooperation and advisory services to assist countries in building and strengthening their national capacity in the rule of law, the administration of justice, and adherence to human rights norms and standards. Criticism will then be perceived as constructive and forward-looking, not finger-pointing in a judgmental way.

Would it not be right for the Expanded Bureau, in the course of the coming year, to engage in consultations on the role of the Commission in acting for the protection of human rights, and how this could be done in a manner that is equitable? I say to all of us, without any exception: We fought for the United Nations to protect human rights. Today, as always, we must be faithful to this historic mission.

Notwithstanding the difficulties experienced at the present session, including a worrying North/South divide in voting on resolutions on issues such as racism and right to development, significant progress has been made. Let me single out the resolution on enforced or involuntary disappearances which requests an open-ended Working Group to prepare, for consideration by the General Assembly, a draft of a new legally binding instrument. Let me also welcome incremental progress made in the resolution on human rights of persons with disabilities which calls on my Office to report to the 59th session of the Commission on progress in the implementation of the recommendations in the study on the Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities presented to this session. Even though I am aware that your resolution to recommend a Protocol to the Convention Against Torture, which would allow for country visits intended to prevent torture, was the subject of much debate, it is my hope that, as the process continues towards eventual adoption in the General Assembly, this will prove to be one of the important outcomes of the present session.

The resolution calling for a special rapporteur on the right to health continues the trend towards better implementation of economic, social and cultural rights. Your resolutions on democracy, participation, the role of good governance in the protection of human rights, and on the role of national institutions deal with vital areas in the promotion and the protection of human rights.

Your call for cooperation with thematic and country mechanisms must be heeded. Resolutions dealing with human rights in various conflict situations contain important recommendations on the advancement of human rights. The resolution on human rights in Afghanistan, will give heart to the long-suffering people of that country. The emphasis you have placed on the implementation of the human rights provisions of the Bonn Agreement provides important policy guidance for the international community and this is a priority commitment for my Office.

Without a doubt, Mr. Chairman, distinguished Delegates, progress was made at the present session. In the hope, therefore, that there will be a broad reflection over the coming months, could I remind you of the way I encouraged members at the Opening of this 58th session to instill particular human rights significance into your membership of the Commission. I suggested that members might consider afresh adherence to those human rights instruments to which they are not yet a party, or review their existing reporting practice or issue a standing invitation to all thematic rapporteurs. This would be an ideal opportunity to lead by example.

Mr. Chairman, Distinguished Members of the Commission, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen:

Allow me to conclude these remarks by referring to the vision of one of the principal drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Professor René Cassin. On 6 December 1947, Professor Cassin submitted a letter to the Working Party on the Implementation of Human Rights that met during the second session of the Commission. Addressing the issue of implementation, he reminded the Commission that it was essential to bear in mind that it and the organs of the United Nations should assure respect for human rights in pursuance of the Charter. It was important, he said, that the normal courts in each country be able to provide effective remedies to those whose rights are at risk.

Professor Cassin foresaw that petitions and complaints should be examined by independent persons of eminent repute appointed by the United Nations with powers of enquiry. He foresaw investigating commissions and a role for the principal organs of the United Nations, including the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, and the International Court of Justice. Professor Cassin concluded:

“Finally, I would draw the Working Parties’ attention to the advisability of gradually increasing the means of implementation – by urging the importance of preventive measures which depend largely on the collaboration of States with the United Nations and the vigilance of public opinion, and means of redress, or even punishment, of the violations committed.”

As we conclude this 58th session of the Commission, let us recall this vision and ask ourselves: To what extent have we been faithful to it? What more can we do to prevent gross violations of human rights?

We should all be able to agree, surely, that the prevention of gross violations of human rights must be the starting point of the human rights agenda of the future. This crucial challenge should be central to our process of reflection.

Thank you.



* *** *