Human Rights Council 29th Session

30 June 2015,
12 p.m.-3 p.m.
Room XX, Palais des Nations, Geneva

Mr. President,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am pleased to speak at this panel discussion, which the Council decided to convene to address the effects of terrorism on the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Terrorism destabilizes governments, undermines societies, jeopardizes peace and security, and threatens economic and social development. This has serious implications for the enjoyment of human rights by all. Acts of terrorism around the world continue to remind us daily, as illustrated again just last week with attacks on three continents in one day, of the direct impact of this scourge on human rights, with devastating consequences for victims, including violations of their right to life, liberty and security.

Terrorist acts concern a high number of direct but also indirect victims, including relatives as well as the entire community to which victims belong and who may live in fear and trauma following the attack.

The human rights of victims of terrorism need to be acknowledged and their loss and  dignity recognised,  as well as their rights to reparation, truth and justice and their right to live free from fear and with the support they require.  They need immediate assistance but also long term medical and psycho-social support, as well as financial support to compensate the destruction of their property or loss of their livelihood and jobs. Victims should be provided with equal access to justice and an effective remedy, through which they can benefit from adequate and prompt reparation for the harm suffered.

If we are to succeed in preventing terrorism, we need to better understand and address the conditions conducive to such abhorrent acts. This also requires a deeper appreciation of the linkages between such conditions and a lack of respect for human rights, corruption, impunity and absence of rule of law. Terrorism tends to thrive in situations of ongoing or prolonged armed conflict, chronic instability and systemic human rights violations. These include discrimination, exclusion or lack of participation in political life and the conduct of public affairs, socio-economic marginalization, all of which have led in some cases to the alienation of parts of the population, including religious, national and other minorities.

These problems are compounded by a lack of accountability and access to justice for victims of human rights violations and abuses. The primary responsibility for accountability falls on States, which have the duty to investigate and, where the evidence warrants, prosecute the perpetrators of violations, in full compliance with international norms and standards, in particular regarding due process and fair trial.

Through the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy adopted by the General Assembly, all Member States agreed to a holistic, integrated approach to addressing terrorism effectively, with human rights and the rule of law as its fundamental basis.

Unfortunately, this has not yet translated into uniform practice on the ground. Measures taken by a number of States in the wake of recent security threats continue to raise serious human rights concerns.

The regular review of counter-terrorism laws and practices is critical to ensure that they are human rights-compliant, and in particular that they are specific, necessary, effective and proportionate.

Some states have enacted broadly formulated counter-terrorism legislation which fails to comply with the principle of legality as it does not contain sufficiently precise definitions of terrorist acts. The breadth and scope of such legislation has allowed for arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement by authorities.

Further, the application of the death penalty to broadly construed terrorism-related offences also remains a serious concern, in particular where such acts do not meet the threshold of “most serious crimes” as provided in article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Violations of the right to due process and fair trial in relation to counter-terrorism continue to be a concern. Some states seek to bypass the criminal justice system, for instance through the use of administrative detention and control orders, and resort to detaining people accused of terrorism without respect for international law safeguards due to all persons deprived of their liberty.

In Some states, counter-terrorism laws have been misused to curb otherwise legitimate activities and to target journalists, human rights defenders, minority groups, members of the political opposition or other individuals, some of whom have been arbitrarily detained and subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment while in custody.

Freedom of opinion and freedom of expression constitute the foundation for every free and democratic society. Any restrictions on freedom of expression must be clearly and narrowly defined and they must meet the three-part test of legality, proportionality and necessity. Such offences as “encouragement of terrorism” and “extremist activity” as well as offences of “praising”, “glorifying”, or “justifying” terrorism or violent extremism, should be clearly defined to ensure that they do not lead to unnecessary or disproportionate interference with freedom of expression.

Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

In conclusion, let me recall that experience at the national level has demonstrated that protecting human rights and ensuring respect for the rule of law contribute to countering terrorism, in particular by creating a climate of trust between the State and those under its jurisdiction, and by supporting the resilience of communities to threats of violent radicalism. Conversely, compromising on human rights has proven corrosive to the rule of law and conducive to a climate of impunity, and may undermine the effectiveness of any counter-terrorism measure, and thereby contribute to greater radicalization towards violence. It is therefore time to stop basing policies on a false dichotomy between security and human rights. These are not competing goals but are inter-related, complementary and mutually reinforcing.

States should focus on policies and initiatives that promote not only civil and political rights but also economic, social and cultural rights, including through initiatives that help eliminate the structural causes of, and frameworks conducive to, violent extremism and terrorism. Such programmes can be particularly helpful when targeted at marginalized groups, including minorities, as it is crucial to address swiftly actual or perceived marginalization and exclusion of particular communities.

I wish you a fruitful discussion.

Thank you