强迫失踪问题委员会在日内瓦召开第十一届会议（部分翻译）

强迫失踪问题委员会

2016年10月3日

选举圣地亚哥·科库埃拉为主席

强迫失踪问题委员会今天上午在日内瓦威尔逊宫召开第十一届会议，听取了联合国人权事务副高级专员凯特·吉尔摩（Kate Gilmore）的发言。委员会选举圣地亚哥·科库埃拉（Santiago Corcuera Cabezut）为主席，并通过了会议议程。

吉尔摩女士在开场发言中感谢了委员会专家在最艰难的人权领域工作中展示出的领导作用，并强调了不允许任何强迫失踪问题沦为遗忘、隐藏或忽视的境地。去年，委员会收到了600多项来自各个家庭要求采取紧急行动的请求，但这只是冰山一角。强迫失踪问题仍在继续，然而各国对《公约》的支持仍不充足。这也是委员会需要思考如何激励支持如此重要的原因。

委员会选举圣地亚哥·科库埃拉为主席，任期两年。委员会的主席团成员将于本周晚些时候进行讨论。

即将离任的委员会主席埃马纽埃尔·德科（Emmanuel Décaux）表示，《公约》的缔约国数量增多，到目前为止达到了52个，同时向委员会提交的报告数量也增多了，这使他深受鼓舞。他注意到与其他条约机构合作所取得的进步，包括在报复问题方面，并指出了与国家人权机构和其他条约机构合作方面的下一步优先事项，并确保防止危害人类罪公约草案包含了对强迫失踪的清晰定义。

新任的委员会主席科奎拉·卡贝祖（Corcuera Cabezut）先生肯定了委员会到目前为止的工作，尤其是在《公约》第三十条方面，及其关于军事法庭司法行政的声明。委员会需要鼓励更多国家批准《公约》，尤其是亚洲国家，并鼓励更广泛地承认委员会在受理个人案件方面的能力。国内没有强迫失踪问题不应该作为各国不批准《公约》的借口。

吉尔摩女士和人权事务高级专员办事处人权条约司司长易卜拉欣·萨拉马（Ibrahim Salama）回应了委员会专家的问题，问题涉及哥伦比亚的和平进程、落实关于条约机构强化进程的第62/682号决议的下一步措施以及实现全球普遍批准《公约》的战略。

委员会随后通过了其议程，并进行了一分钟默哀以纪念强迫失踪的受害者。

委员会公开会议在此进行网络直播： http://webtv.un.org/

委员会将于10月4日（周二）下午3点举行下一次公开会议，开始审议波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那的首份报告(CED/C/BIH/1)。

Opening Address

KATE GILMORE, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, in her opening remarks, thanked the Committee for its leadership in this hardest area of human rights work, and stressed the importance of not allowing any enforced disappearance to be converted into forgetting, invisibility or neglect.  The countries with the greatest number of enforced disappearances were Iraq and Sri Lanka, and that was where the work of the Committee was especially important.  Over the past year, the Committee had received more than 600 requests from families to take urgent action - this was only the tip of the iceberg; enforced disappearances continued, and families continued to languish in uncertainty.  However, the support for the Convention by States was insufficient, and that was why it was important for the Committee to think how to galvanize that support.  The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights deeply valued the work of the Committee on this issue which it considered of extreme importance, and Ms. Gilmore urged the members of the Committee to think how to increase the cooperation.

Statements
 
EMMANUEL DÉCAUX, outgoing Committee Chairperson, said that the tenth anniversary of the entry into force of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance would be soon celebrated, and noted with satisfaction that the number of States parties since then had grown from 20 to 52.  The number of reports submitted to the Committee was encouraging, which pointed to the need for more time to be allocated to the Committee for the consideration of reports. Mr. Décaux noted the progress made by Chairpersons of treaty bodies on the adoption of the San Jose Guidelines against Intimidation or Reprisals and expressed hope that the next Chairperson would continue to make progress on the issue of engagement with national human rights institutions and with other treaty bodies.  The Committee had a regular, two way communication with the Chairperson of the Working Group on enforced disappearances, as well as with the International Law Commission, which was working on drafting a convention on the prevention of crimes against humanity; enforced disappearances could be seen as a crime against humanity and therefore it was very important that the definition of enforced disappearances would not be diluted and watered down. 

SANTIAGO CORCUERA CABEZUT, Committee Chairperson, in his first address as Chair to the Committee, stressed that relatives of disappeared victims were the reasons for which the Convention, the Committee and the Working Group on enforced disappearances existed.  The commitment to address the indescribable suffering of disappeared persons and their relatives, and their trust into the Committee, fed and justified the Committee’s work.  Mr. Corcuera Cabezut noted the work of the Committee on Article 30 of the Convention, as well as its statements, including on the administration of justice by military courts, which provided interpretative guidelines for access to justice in the area of enforced disappearances.  To date, only 52 States were parties to the Convention, 96 were signatories - the Committee needed to encourage the ratification of the Convention, particularly among Asian countries, and also encourage greater recognition of the competence of the Committee in hearing individual cases.  No country, no person, no organization, could be in favour of the heinous practice of enforced disappearances, which caused so much suffering to victims and to their families.  Stressing the preventative functions of the Convention, Mr. Corcuera Cabezut said that not having enforced disappearances in a country should not be used as an excuse by a State not to ratify the Convention.
 
Discussion

In response to Experts’ questions, Ms. Gilmore said that the aspiration and promise of universal human rights obliged all to be unrelenting in the determination to support Member States in keeping promises they made, including those contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  It took quite a bit of machinery and a lot of determination to detect human rights violations, and a deep moral commitment to those reporting the violations, in particular enforced disappearances.  On the situation in Colombia, Ms. Gilmore said that the results of the referendum were a setback, noting that those who were closest to the conflict yearned most for the peace.  It was important to think about victims and their families.  The Deputy High Commissioner recalled the courage and determination of the Madres de la Plaza de Mayo in Argentina to shine the light on the truth and hoped that Colombia would find courage and inspiration from their example.

IBRAHIM SALAMA, Director, Human Rights Treaties Division, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, on the implementation of the resolution 62/268, said that treaty bodies in their functioning gave life to the human rights norms; it was easier to create and sign up to the norms, than it was to implement them.  States had agreed to resolution 62/268 on the treaty bodies strengthening process; the treaty bodies and their Experts had done their part, and now it was up to the States to follow through on the report on the implementation of the resolution; the Office was confident that more resources would be allocated to the treaty bodies.  It was the moment of truth for the States, to live up to their responsibility.

Concerning the universality of the Convention, Ms. Gilmore said that it was inexplicable that there would be any hesitance to decry disappearances, and a resistance to the ratification of the Convention, and said that the expectation of the Office was to achieve universal ratification.  It was up to the human rights system to make it very difficult for States to explain why they did not ratify – it was too easy right now to step away and do nothing.  The Office was exploring different avenues to increase ratification, including through the Universal Periodic Review, the work with the United Nations Resident Coordinator, and – once the General Assembly agreed - the increasing of the presence of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights outside of Geneva to facilitate strategic engagement with Member States on strengthening the normative framework, including on enforced disappearances, and developing strong partnerships with civil society.  The demand for disappearances to disappear was a universal one.

 __________

For use of the information media; not an official record

Follow UNIS Geneva on: Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube |Flickr