STATEMENT BY H.E. MS TARJA HALONEN, MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF FINLAND; 55TH SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

26 March 1999



Mme Chairperson,

Let me, first of all, congratulate you on your election to the Chairmanship of this Commission. I wish you and the other members of the Bureau every success in your important tasks. May I assure you that you can count on the full support and co-operation of the Finnish delegation.

Let me also take this opportunity to express my appreciation and thanks to Mrs Mary Robinson, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, for the extensive and valuable work she has carried out in the exercise of her office.

In addition to what was said earlier by Mr Fischer, the Foreign Minister of Germany, on behalf of the European Union, I wish to make the following remarks.

Although the primary responsibility for ensuring human rights remains with Governments, the United Nations, as a global organisation, has an indispensable role in promoting human rights. Today I would like to highlight three areas where further steps are needed; namely implementation of human rights standards, developing human rights mechanisms and supporting the activities of the High Commissioner.

Firstly, Finland would like to echo once more the repeated calls for the universal ratification of all core human rights treaties. The accession to human rights Conventions has in fact made progress. However, there are still serious and even surprising deficiencies regarding the ratification of treaties. Even the universal ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child has still not been achieved at the eve of the tenth anniversary of the Convention, as two countries have not acceded to the Convention. For the individual, however, what makes all the difference is that the ratification is followed by effective implementation.

The system is based on the notion that whenever States take upon themselves international treaty obligations they do this in good faith and with a genuine intention to implement them. Finland urges all Governments to accede to human rights treaties without reservations incompatible with their objective and purpose. We also call upon States Parties to review all their other reservations with a view to withdrawing them. Human rights are universal and should not be undermined by vague and sweeping reservations. Finland has objected to reservations by certain countries that in a general manner give priority to national law and other regulations. The fact that in many instances these reservations invoke religious or other doctrines does not in any way legitimise them.

Suppressing impunity for human rights violations has become a key theme in ensuring compliance with human rights standards. The adoption of the Statute for the International Criminal Court (ICC) in Rome last July was a major step towards creating a permanent, effective enforcement mechanism of human rights law. For Finland the creation and the early activation of the ICC is now a priority. Finland emphasises the importance of timely and widespread endorsement and ratification of the ICC Statute. In a spirit of co-operation, all States should do their utmost to facilitate the entry into force of this major instrument of future human rights law.

Mme Chairperson,

We Finns are quite pragmatic. For me it is therefore important to ask how we can best put human rights standards into practise. One must be prepared to see if the structures, when in place, effectively serve the cause they have been created for.

Finland gives full recognition to the important role played by the mechanisms of this Commission. We fully support the guiding principle of the report of the Bureau. It is important to enhance the capacity of the United Nations to promote and protect internationally recognised human rights and to contribute to the prevention of human rights violations. We must use the momentum and proceed with the proposals contained in the report.

Finland calls on all Governments to co-operate with human rights mechanisms and to allow them access to the country concerned without imposing limitations on their work. In cases where Governments do not co-operate, it is justifiable to draw attention to such matters in this Commission. Finland finds it totally unacceptable that the Special Rapporteurs still fail to receive the full co-operation of all States in discharging their mandates.

At the same time, we must make sure that essential human rights issues are covered by the appropriate mechanisms. Finland notes with satisfaction that the area of economic, social and cultural rights is now better covered. The Special Procedures on education and extreme poverty have started to fulfil their mandates.

The issue of gender is crucial in this respect. It is essential that all human rights mechanisms, either thematic or those concentrating on country situations, apply a gender perspective. Finland appreciates the work of the first Special Rapporteur concentrating on women's rights. I would like to congratulate the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women for her excellent work. However, one Rapporteur on women's rights is not enough. Finland will continue to insist that a gender perspective is included in the mandates of all relevant human rights mechanisms.


Mme Chairperson,

The activities of the High Commissioner for Human Rights have clearly expanded in recent years. There is, among other things, a growing demand for human rights' field operations. Field operations can be instrumental in supporting the development of a sustainable human rights culture, especially in times of change. Human rights should also be effectively linked to various UN actions, for instance in crisis situations. Finland for its part will continue to donate funds directly to the various operations of the High Commissioner, including field operations.

However, not everything can be financed through voluntary contributions. Finland has repeatedly called for additional resources for the High Commissioner to be provided from the UN regular budget. Finland associates herself with the appeal by this Commission for more regular budget resources.


Mme Chairperson,

Racism is truly a human rights issue. It is not enough for Governments to refrain from racist and discriminatory actions themselves. Governments also have a responsibility to take action to eliminate racial discrimination in their societies and promote understanding among races. The World Conference on Racism is an appropriate occasion for exchanging experiences on how to best achieve this ambitious and important goal. And there is no way of being proactive without NGOs. It is essential that transparency towards civil society is maintained throughout the process.

During the preparations for the World Conference we must try to grasp the whole picture of racism. Women, for instance, may have their own distinctive experience of double-discrimination based on ethnic origin combined with gender. Children of minority ethnic origin may not obtain a just start to their lives because of barriers to education. Minorities and indigenous peoples are almost by definition more vulnerable than the majority population to violations of their human rights, and in some cases to violence.

Racism is still a serious world-wide problem. We should view this issue truly as one that concerns all of us.

It is important that regional preparations are not viewed as separate processes but closely linked to the World Conference itself. In Europe a lot remains to be done. The Roma people, for instance, continue to face discrimination in various parts of Europe. Immigrant communities encounter xenophobia in a variety of situations and often feel excluded from our societies.

Finland hopes that the World Conference on Racism in the year 2001 will give a boost to the efforts to promote the universal ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. This would be an important step in combating all forms of discrimination based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.

Finland finds that the protection of minorities and indigenous peoples is at present not sufficient. This being so, new instruments as well as the strengthening of existing mechanisms should be considered. As to the rights of indigenous peoples, the valuable contribution of the ILO provides us with a basis for their further development.


Mme Chairperson,

Finland opposes the death penalty in all circumstances and actively advocates its abolition world-wide. This objective may seem an obvious one. However, as the capital punishment is still maintained in numerous countries, let me explain our point of view a little bit more. Finland´s position is based on our own experience. We have not carried out any executions in peace time since the year 1826 and the last provisions regarding the use of death penalty under martial law were removed in 1972.

The death penalty is an inhuman form of punishment. The practice of confining persons condemned to death for long periods can also be considered as a form of inhuman, cruel or degrading treatment. If a trial is not conducted fairly, the imposition of the death penalty is a serious miscarriage of justice. The death penalty can also discriminate against certain groups in society. An essential argument against the death penalty is that it always carries with it the risk of innocent people being executed - after which no remedy exists. Moreover, research has shown that capital punishment does not act as a deterrent.

As a first step, Finland expects countries to refrain from carrying out executions. It is true that international law does not prohibit the death penalty as such, but it lays down several important restrictions on its use. The death penalty can only be used for the most serious crimes and never in the case of minors and pregnant women. It should not be applied to persons who have become insane. Moreover, the Convention on the Rights of the Child prohibits imposition and use of the death penalty for a crime committed by a person below 18 years of age. There are also minimum requirements as to the manner in which the death penalty is imposed and implemented. In this context, the guarantee of a fair trial is extremely crucial. However, the minimum guarantees covering the death penalty under international law are not always met.

Work to combat the death penalty is more prominent in international fora than was formerly the case. Finland welcomes this development. The Commission on Human Rights has adopted a resolution aimed at restricting the use of the death penalty. Finland has given active support to this project and will support similar moves in the future. There are now 105 countries in the world that have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice. Finland urges all these countries to ratify the Second Optional Protocol of the ICCPR, which prohibits the use of the death penalty in States Parties.


Mme Chairperson,

Because of the limited time, I have concentrated on three themes: strengthening human rights, combating racism and abolishing the death penalty. I am fully aware that your agenda is much broader. Promoting human rights is a challenge without limits. I wish you all success in your endeavours.

Thank you, Mme Chairperson.