人权理事会开始有关促进和保护所有人权的一般性辩论（部分翻译）

上午

2015年3月13日

听取高级专员和秘书长的专题报告以及联合检查组的一份报告

人权理事会今天上午听取了高级专员和联合国秘书长的专题报告和一份由联合检查组撰写的报告，随后听取了有关这些报告和促进与保护包括发展权在内的所有人权、公民、政治、经济、社会和文化权利的一般性辩论。

人权事务副高级专员弗拉维亚·潘谢里介绍了高级专员和秘书长的20份报告，这些报告涵盖了在反恐同时保护人权和基本自由，外国战士，民族或族裔、宗教和语言上属于少数群体的人的权利，失踪人口，社会保护最低标准倡议，有关通过军事法庭进行司法行政的专家协商会，联合国和区域人权机制在促进和保护人权方面的合作，酷刑受害者自愿基金的活动和由《禁止酷刑公约》任择议定书建立的特别基金。

联合检查组督察员戈皮纳坦·阿卡姆库朗盖尔（Gopinathan Achamkulangare）表示，检查组关于“对人权高专办管理和行政的审议”的报告是应理事会于2013年发出的关于全面审议人权高专办的管理和行政，尤其是其对招聘政策和职员构成的影响的特别请求而撰写的。

报告中的建议重点关注办事处人员的组成，包括其地理分布和性别均衡问题。正式建议包括成员国的治理和监督，风险管理，战略规划，工作人员的地域分布，人力资源管理和联合国系统内的人权主流化。

在有关促进和保护所有人权的一般性辩论中，发言者提出了许多问题，其中包括单方面强制性措施，极端主义暴力及其克服措施，社会保护最低标准，为儿童权利投资，促进保护无人陪护儿童和青年移民人权的必要性，埃博拉疫情的影响和基督徒在中东的困境。人权支柱正面临着极大的财政压力，这将损害其响应不断增加的需求的能力。如果其资金结构失衡的问题未得到解决，人权高专办关键的资金赤字便会进一步加剧。一些发言者强调称，高级专员及其办事处应共同发挥促进和保护人权的独立任务，各国不应寻求对办事处的微观管理。一些国家对办事处越来越多地依赖自愿捐赠表示关切，并相信办事处的核心活动应由常规预算而非自愿捐赠资助。各方还一直认为，为了更好地反映联合国成员的多元化，促进办事处工作人员的地理和性别均衡十分重要。

在讨论中发言的有：伊朗代表不结盟运动，印度尼西亚代表东南亚国家联盟，玻利维亚代表我们美洲人民玻利瓦尔联盟，巴西代表南方共同市场，黎巴嫩代表一个国家集团，美国代表40个国家，巴基斯坦代表一个意见相似的国家集团，智利代表一个国家集团，拉脱维亚代表欧盟，土耳其代表一个国家集团，萨尔瓦多代表一个国家集团，墨西哥代表一个国家集团发表跨区域声明，厄瓜多尔代表拉丁美洲和加勒比国家集团，阿尔巴尼亚代表一个74国集团，爱尔兰、美国、巴基斯坦、古巴、荷兰、塞拉利昂、摩洛哥、英国、韩国、中国、博茨瓦纳、印度、南非、萨尔瓦多、委内瑞拉、俄罗斯、墨西哥、巴西、阿尔及利亚、尼日利亚、卡塔尔、埃及、挪威、突尼斯、波兰、欧洲、瑞士、苏丹、伊朗、哥斯达黎加、西班牙、尼日尔、菲律宾、白俄罗斯、乌拉圭、利比亚、丹麦议和朝鲜民主主义人民共和国。

理事会将于下午1点再次召开会议，届时将继续有关促进和保护包括发展权在内的所有人权、公民、政治、经济、社会和文化权利的一般性辩论。

文件

理事会已收到有关特别程序结论和建议的报告（A/HRC/28/19）

理事会已收到秘书处关于联合检查组报告和联合国人权事务高级专员办事处管理和行政事务后续审查的说明（A/HRC/28/22）

理事会已收到秘书处关于联合检查组报告和联合国人权事务高级专员办事处管理和行政事务后续审查的说明增编（A/HRC/28/22/Add.1）

理事会已收到秘书长有关《消除酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》任择议定书设立的特别基金的报告（A/HRC/28/24）

理事会已收到秘书长关于联合国援助酷刑受害者自愿基金的说明（A/HRC/28/25）

理事会已收到联合国人权事务高级专员关于民族或族裔、宗教和语言上属于少数群体的人的权利的报告（A/HRC/28/27）

理事会已收到联合国人权事务高级专员关于在反恐同时保护人权和基本自由的报告（A/HRC/28/28）

理事会已收到有关保护被剥夺自由者人权的小组讨论概要——联合国人权高专办的报告（A/HRC/28/29）

理事会已收到有关人权理事会关于预防在促进和保护人权中的作用的小组讨论成果的概要报告——联合国人权事务高级专员办事处的报告（A/HRC/28/30）

理事会已收到联合国人权事务高级专员关于促进和保护人权的区域安排的研讨会的报告（A/HRC/28/31）

理事会已收到有关通过军事法庭开展司法行政和全面司法体系在打击人权侵犯方面的作用的专家研讨会期间的讨论概要——联合国人权事务高级专员的报告（A/HRC/28/32）

理事会已收到联合国人权事务高级专员关于更好地对儿童权利投资的报告（A/HRC/28/33）

理事会已收到有关加强消除对儿童暴力的全球努力的小组讨论概要——联合国人权事务高级专员的报告（A/HRC/28/34）

理事会已收到秘书长关于在各国实现经济、社会与文化权利问题的报告（A/HRC/28/35）

理事会已收到关于历史教学和纪念进程的小组讨论概要——联合国人权事务高级专员的报告（A/HRC/28/36）

理事会已收到人权理事会关于依照国际法使用遥控飞机或武装无人机问题的专家小组互动讨论概要 - 联合国人权事务高级专员办事处的报告（A/HRC/28/38）

理事会已收到关于促进和保护数字时代的隐私权问题的小组讨论概要——联合国人权事务高级专员的报告（A/HRC/28/39）

理事会已收到人权理事会关于保护家庭问题的小组讨论概要——联合国人权事务高级专员办事处的报告（A/HRC/28/40）

理事会已收到人权理事会关于保护家庭问题的小组讨论概要更正——联合国人权事务高级专员办事处的报告（A/HRC/28/40/Corr.1）

理事会已收到人权理事会关于保护家庭问题的小组讨论概要第二份更正——联合国人权事务高级专员办事处的报告（A/HRC/28/40/Corr.2）

理事会已收到联合国人权事务高级专员关于在国家层面支持包容性和参与性发展和减贫的技术援助的报告（A/HRC/28/42）

理事会已收到联合国人权事务高级专员关于打击基于宗教或信仰原因的不宽容、负面陈规定型、侮辱、歧视、煽动暴力和暴力侵害行为的报告（A/HRC/28/47）

理事会已收到秘书处对秘书长关于失踪人员问题报告的说明（A/HRC/28/52）

理事会已收到国家外债和其他有关国际金融义务对充分享有所有人权、尤其是经济、社会、文化权利的影响问题独立专家胡安·巴勃罗·波霍斯拉夫斯基的中期研究——非法资金流动、人权与2015年后发展议程（A/HRC/28/60）

理事会已收到国家外债和其他有关国际金融义务对充分享有所有人权、尤其是经济、社会、文化权利的影响问题独立专家胡安·巴勃罗·波霍斯拉夫斯基的中期研究更正——非法资金流动、人权与2015年后发展议程（A/HRC/28/60/Corr.1）

理事会已收到特别程序的来文报告（A/HRC/28/85）

人权事务副高级专员介绍高级专员和秘书长的专题报告

人权事务副高级专员弗拉维亚·潘谢里在介绍高级专员和秘书长的专题报告时表示，理事会已收到20份涉及多项专题问题的报告，并重点关注其中九份报告中的最重要成果。关于打击恐怖主义同时保护人权与基本自由的报告强调了各国确保保护人民免受暴力和不安全以及伸张正义的措施必须建立在尊重国际人权法的基础上；为了实现这一点，这些措施必须经过广泛和包容性的协商，符合国际人权准则和合法性原则，并接受定期审议，而非常规的措施则应受到及时控制。有关外国士兵的报告建议各国通过建立信任、支持民间社会和打击有罪不罚等方式来应对导致恐怖主义和极端主义的问题。副高级专员在介绍有关民族或族裔、宗教和语言上属于少数群体的人的权利的报告时表示，报告提到了一些国家针对少数族裔或宗教团体的暴力增加的情况，并提供了为各国和其他利益攸关方提供实用建议的导则和工具，包括“秘书长关于种族歧视和保护少数族裔的指导说明”，这是加强倡导预防和打击侵犯少数群体权利方面的重要参考。联合国秘书长关于失踪人员的报告建议各国采取一系列步骤，包括真正理解失踪人员家人的需求，建立旨在预防和应对失踪人员问题的立法和机构框架，以及培养地方法医的能力。

关于在各国实现经济、社会与文化权利的报告探讨了最低社会保障标准举措问题。最低社会保障标准对促进基本收入安全和获得医疗护理至关重要，它们还是人权准则的有效补充。该举措为将人权义务付诸实践提供了有用的政策指导，秘书长也鼓励各国建立全面社会保障体系。有关通过军事法庭开展司法行政和全面司法体系在打击人权侵犯方面的作用的专家研讨会的报告概括了四项最新发现，包括不应在军事法庭中审判平民的人权原则。关于加强联合国和区域人权机制在促进和保护人权方面和合作的国际研讨会（2014年10月举行）的报告建议区域和次区域人权法院定期召开会议，并建议于2015年10月举行有关执行判决、向法院申述、人权维护者、剥夺自由和言论自由等问题的会议。潘谢里女士在介绍有关酷刑受害者自愿基金的报告时表示，该基金对从叙利亚、中非共和国和乌克兰逃离的酷刑受害者的需求作出了快速响应。根据《禁止酷刑公约》任择议定书建立的，旨在帮助国家防范机制的资金和落实的特别基金已于2011年开始运作，截至2014年已发放七项赠款。副高级专员在最后提请各方关注秘书长对联合检查组报告中提出的六点建议的意见和关切。

Statement by the Joint Inspection Unit of the United Nations System

GOPINATHAN ACHAMKULANGARE, Inspector, Joint Inspection Unit of the United Nations System, said the Unit’s report on the “Review of Management and Administration of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’, was in response to a specific request made by the Council in 2013 to undertake a comprehensive review of the management and administration of the Office of the High Commissioner, in particular with regard to its impact on the recruitment policies and composition of staff. The recommendations in the report, the first full-fledged review of the Office of the High Commissioner in more than a decade, focused on the composition of the Office’s workforce, including its geographical distribution and gender balance. The report acknowledged progress made by the Office, sought to enhance its effectiveness and transparency, reinforce its strategic positioning and make a compelling case for substantially increasing the Office’s regular budget resources. Six formal recommendations had been made covering governance and oversight by Member States, risk management, strategic planning, geographical distribution of staff, human resources management and mainstreaming of human rights across the United Nations system. The review made an additional 35 informal recommendations for further improvements, noted Mr. Achamkulangare.

Recommendation 1 called on the General Assembly to initiate an action-orientated review of the governance arrangements of the Office, through an open-ended working group or ad hoc committee. Recommendation 2 called on the High Commissioner to establish, by the end of 2016, a risk management policy for the Office. Recommendation 3 suggested that the High Commissioner establish a working group to review the Office’s strategic planning processes. Recommendation 4 required the High Commissioner to update by the end of 2015 the action plan to broaden the geographical diversity of the professional workforce, recognizing that the Office faced the challenge of transforming itself from a headquarters-based organization to a field-based one, as 40 per cent of its staff members were now in the field. Recommendation 5 called on the High Commissioner to develop a comprehensive strategy and action plan for the Secretariat’s human resources management strategy to be adapted to the specific requirements of the Office. Recommendation 6 called on the Secretary-General to review the mandates, activities and work of different entities with human rights mandates with a view to streamline their work and mainstream human rights across the United Nations system.

General Debate on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, including the Right to Development

Iran, speaking on behalf of the Non Aligned Movement, said that the multiple and complex challenges faced by today’s world called for global solutions through the enhancement of international cooperation and by setting up innovative and practical mechanisms. To that end, establishing a democratic, equitable and stable international order and working towards the realization of the right to development was of high importance. The Movement was deeply disturbed by the imposition of unilateral coercive measures by some self-appointed guardians of the temple.

Indonesia, speaking on behalf of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, said that Beijing +20 provided an opportunity for the international community to position gender equality and women’s empowerment at the heart of the global agenda of sustainable development, peace and security and human rights. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations had made progress in addressing women’s issues, including the 2012 adoption of the Vientiane Declaration on Enhancing Gender Perspective, and was supportive of efforts and partnerships to promote the status of women.

Bolivia, speaking on behalf of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA), recognized the efforts of Venezuela to improve its relationship with the United States. The unilateral sanctions that the United States had imposed against officials of the Venezuelan State were an assault on its sovereignty, and the Alliance categorically rejected the imposition of those and other coercive measures. The new sanctions imposed under the cloak of human rights intended to destabilize the State and change its political regime.

Brazil, speaking on behalf of the Common Southern Market MERCOSUR, said the Presidents of MERCOSUR had expressed their deep-seated objections to the law providing sanctions on Venezuela passed by the United States. Those sanctions violated the principle of non-intervention in the affairs of a sovereign State and did not foster peace, development or international cooperation. The Presidents of MERCOSUR called on the United States to refrain from applying sanctions to Venezuela.

Lebanon, speaking on behalf of a Group of States, said the instability and conflict in the Middle East had disastrous consequences for the entire population of the region, and the existence of Christians in particular was especially affected, with even their very survival in question. Communities and individuals had fallen victim to barbaric acts of violence, sold into slavery, killed, beheaded and burnt alive. Dozens of Christian churches and ancient shrines of all religions had been destroyed. Lebanon called on all stakeholders in the Middle East to build together a culture of peaceful coexistence.

United States, speaking on behalf of a like-minded cross-regional Group of 40 States, said they shared the well-founded concern about the situation facing Christians and members of other minorities in the Middle East. Cognisant that Muslims comprised the main victims of terrorism and persecution in the Middle East, they spoke separately to underscore that their concern extended to all people facing persecution without regard to religion or ethnicity.

Pakistan, speaking on behalf of a like-minded Group of Countries, firmly believed that it would have been appropriate to have a stand-alone discussion on the management and administration of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, which was particularly relevant in the light of the reorganization announced by the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Another important issue raised by the report of the Joint Inspection Unit was the lack of an intergovernmental body which governed the activities of the Office, and the challenges the Office faced at the end of 2014 which increased concerns about financial aspects of its functioning.

Chile, speaking on behalf of a Group of States, initiators of the Convention against Torture Initiative, said that the ambition was to achieve universal ratification and implementation of the Convention by 2024. The States drew attention to the progress achieved by Eritrea, Palestine, Viet Nam, Finland, Greece, Mongolia, Niger, Indonesia and others, and said that, while national achievements did not guarantee that torture would be eradicated, they were important steps towards a better implementation of the Convention.

Latvia, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the rights of the child were an integral part of their fundamental rights policy, reiterated the commitment to eliminating all forms of violence against children, and stressed the importance of a sustainable, equitable and broad-based investment in the rights of children. The European Union stressed the responsibility of States to implement social protection floors and said that the coordination of the social security systems had been one of the pillars of the European integration process; those systems guaranteed access to several services that were vital to the preservation of human dignity.

Turkey, speaking on behalf of a Group of States, said everybody was proud of the increasingly assertive Human Rights Council and its many achievements since 2006. However the Council should not become a victim of its own success. Challenges ahead included the increased time pressure on the Council’s agenda, the continued inflation in its output, the insufficient allocation of resources for follow-up and implementation, the mandate-resource gap and the continued duplication of work between Geneva and New York.

El Salvador, speaking on behalf of a Group of States, emphasized the need for the protection of the human rights of unaccompanied children and adolescent migrants. The States said the Council should take up the proposal of the Advisory Committee to prepare a study on that subject, and asked the Council to keep its attention on the phenomenon and its repercussions on the full enjoyment of human rights of unaccompanied migrant children.

Mexico, speaking in a cross-regional statement on behalf of a Group of States, said the human rights pillar was under great financial pressure which undermined its capacity to respond to increasing demands. They included new mandates approved by the Council, requests from States for support and a growing focus on human rights in United Nations operations. If the imbalance in its funding structure was not addressed the critical funding deficit of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights would be further exacerbated.

Ecuador, speaking on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, reaffirmed their rejection of unilateral coercive measures and voiced concern about the application of unilateral measures by the United States against the Government of Venezuela and urged all members of the international community not to intervene directly or indirectly into internal affairs of other States and to respect the principle of sovereignty.

Albania, speaking on behalf of a group of 74 States, reaffirmed that acts, methods and practices of violent extremism destroyed human rights and democracy, and destabilized legitimately constituted Governments. The international community must take steps to counter and combat extremist radical violence. The States deplored the suffering of victims of violent extremism and affirmed that all measures to counter terrorism must comply with States’ international legal and human rights obligations.

Ireland said that the mandate of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was a challenging one, which required it not only to support the actions of States, but to challenge them; not only to provide States with technical cooperation and assistance but to spur conscience and investigate, advocate and comment publicly on the actions of States. Working under the direction of the Secretary-General provided the appropriate accountability structure and any suggestion that States or the Human Rights Council should interject themselves into this relationship was inappropriate.

United States expressed concerns over aspects of the report of the Joint Inspection Unit, which impinged on the independence of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and his Office. It stressed that States had a limited oversight role over the activities of the Office of the High Commissioner. The United States said that artistic expression and creativity as a form of freedom of expression was fundamental to the development of vibrant cultures and the functioning of democratic societies. Artistic expression had come under particular attack because it conveyed specific messages and articulated symbolic values in a powerful way.

Pakistan was concerned that the rights of the Kashmiri people to self-determination had been consistently denied with impunity for more than six decades. Pakistan called for allowing access to international human rights organizations to the Occupied Jammu and Kashmir. It stressed that struggles for self-determination could not be misrepresented by equating them with terrorism, and highlighted some of the continuous human rights violations reported in Occupied Kashmir, including killings, enforced disappearances, torture and restriction on freedoms of movement and expression.

Cuba gave its unconditional support to Venezuela and rejected the unilateral action by the United States against it. No one had the right to interfere in the internal affairs of a sovereign State. The report of the Joint Inspection Unit contained important elements for structural change of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights of particular relevance. The making of the Office Management Plan had to be reformed to ensure better transparency of the work of the Office. Cuba noted the failure by the Office to ensure a fair geographical composition of its staff.

Netherlands said restrictive laws on freedom of the press and Internet freedom, and the imposition of penalties affected freedom of expression both online and offline and impeded members of civil society from doing their work. The Netherlands condemned worrying trends that had been observed of the use of corporal punishment to curb freedom of expression. It further called on Governments to condemn acts of violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, against human rights defenders, and against religious minorities.

Sierra Leone, speaking about the impact of Ebola on human rights, said that in its war against Ebola, Sierra Leone had had to resort to declaring a state of public emergency, which was strictly limited to Ebola-related conduct. That meant some restrictions on human rights guaranteed by the constitution, such as free movement or detention of people who deliberately obstructed health workers. Despite challenges from human rights defenders and institutions Sierra Leone’s national focus continued to be the eradication of Ebola.

Morocco regretted that the Joint Inspection Unit’s report was not translated into the six official languages of the United Nations. Its recommendations on financial resources echoed the work of a Group of States, including Morocco in 2013. The main challenge faced by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was financial predictability which was cruelly lacking. Morocco also spoke about efforts to combat the increasing terrorist threat and growth of extremist ideologies, calling for collective vigilance and resolute action.

United Kingdom expressed concern about some of the recommendations by the Joint Inspection Unit on the management and administration of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. It was clear that the High Commissioner and his Office functioned as one single unit which enjoyed an independent mandate to promote and protect human rights, and States should not engage in seeking to micromanage the Office. The United Kingdom expressed support for the cross-regional statement on the plight of Christians in the Middle East.

Republic of Korea said that the value of the work of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights could not be overemphasized and that the rapidly broadening gap between the funding shortfall and the demands placed on the Office was not sustainable. The Republic of Korea commended the new initiative by the High Commissioner to prioritize his work and to reorganize his Office to maximize its efficiency, and stressed that in this process his independence should not be infringed under any circumstances.

China expressed support for the recommendations by the Joint Inspection Unit and said that the Office of the High Commissioner should ensure balanced use of its limited resources to ensure balanced treatment of economic, social and cultural rights on one hand and civil and political rights on the other. The Office should support Member States with technical assistance and actively seek their opinions. China was opposed to the use of unilateral coercive measures and encouraged the Advisory Committee to continue to monitor this issue.

Botswana reiterated the need to implement the General Assembly resolution on ensuring equitable geographical representation in all United Nations organizations and hoped the Office of the High Commissioner would adopt extra measures to achieve this goal. The report of the Joint Inspection Unit raised issues of governance and oversight with respect to the High Commissioner. Botswana took note of the differing views in this regard. It stressed the importance of the independence of High Commissioner.

India said the Joint Inspection Unit review underlined the different nature of the High Commissioner and his Office. It pointed at gaps in the governance of the Office and gave elements to address the failures in its management. India remained committed to support the mandate of the Office and its independence, objectivity and non-selectivity. Member States had the responsibility to address issues in the functioning of the Office of the High Commissioner. This was not a violation of the independence of the Office, but a way to make States trust it more.

South Africa welcomed the work by the Secretary-General on economic, social and cultural rights. It underlined that social protection was both a human right and a sound economic policy. South Africa agreed on the importance of putting in place comprehensive social protection systems and floors. South Africa had made significant political and socio-economic strides since 1994, including reform of its social security system and South Africa’s Development Plan 2030, which gave social protection a central role and ensured that no one lived below a minimum standard of living.

EL Salvador said it supported the approach to the reform of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights that would promote all human rights in an equal manner, without selectivity. It was necessary to provide adequate funds for the Office so that it could carry out wide ranging work, respecting the geographical and gender balance. El Salvador would continue supporting the work of the Office.

Venezuela noted that the imposition of unilateral coercive measures, used as means for political and economic strength against developing countries, violated the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. The Government of the United States had passed a law on unilateral coercive sanctions against Venezuela in December 2014, using human rights as a pretext. The Government of the United States pretended to divert the humanist and just direction of the Bolivarian Revolution, and to intimidate those governments that did not bend to its aims.

Russian Federation supported Venezuela’s statement, emphasizing that it was unacceptable to impose such economic sanctions against it. It warned that there were increasing attempts to use the United Nations to achieve various political and economic goals. That would lead only to increased confrontation. In light of the announced reform of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Russia welcomed its more effective work, and reform of its methodology and distribution of work. In order to improve its transparency, it was necessary to address the current unbalance in geographical distribution.

Mexico valued the thematic study on independent living for persons with disabilities, which helped States to identify necessary actions. Strengthening measures for different degrees of disability would help Governments to determine adequate measures. Mexico voiced concern about the wrong assumption in the report on the distinction between the High Commissioner and his Office, because it would give rise to duplication of the work of the Office. Mexico believed that the current work of the Office reflected an appropriate balance.

Brazil considered that the Joint Inspection Unit was an important tool at the disposal of Member States to promote transparency, accountability and oversight of the United Nations. It expressed concern about the increasing reliance by the Office on voluntary contributions, and believed that core activities of the Office should be funded by the regular budget, rather than by voluntary contributions. It also agreed that it was important to promote geographical and gender balance of the Office staff, with a view to better reflect the composition of the United Nations membership, as diversity was an asset and a necessity for the Office.

Algeria highlighted the central importance of sharing good practices in the combat against violence against children, and the key role of the Human Rights Council in that respect. As for the report of the Joint Inspection Unit reviewing the management and administration of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Algeria stressed that it was necessary to strengthen the work of the Office to allow it to carry out its mandate in an unbiased manner.

Nigeria said the terrorist organization Boko Haram, in the north-east of Nigeria, had bombed mosques, churches and civilian areas, using children and women as suicide bombers. It had caused over 650,000 internally displaced persons and thousands of refugees. Nigeria warned that if Boko Haram was not stopped its activities would spread to central Africa and beyond. It called on the global community to treat Nigeria’s situation with the same level of urgency and resources as seen in the Middle East in the battle against ISIS.

Qatar said Gulf Council States were among the first to respect all international human rights instruments, in line with their laws and religious specificities. However, some countries tried to politicize their lofty values to attack the sovereign rights of States using selective criteria. The ceiling of freedom must stop with the respect for public bodies and authorities. Freedom of expression could not be a pretext for other violations, emphasized Qatar.

Egypt referred to the Joint Inspection Unit and regretted that the High Commissioner announced his Functional Review before listening to States’ views today. Claiming the independence of the High Commissioner was a myth created by those who would like to see him so. If the Secretary-General of the United Nations himself was not independent, there could hardly be a situation where a group of Member States could unjustifiably claim the independence of any other senior United Nations official to perform their functions without being manipulated by on group of States.

Norway said the United Nations through its Member States had consistently maintained that without a high degree of independence the High Commissioner could not perform his duties nor play an active role in achieving the full realization of all human rights, as requested by Member States. Norway expressed concerns over several aspects of the Joint Inspection Unit report, especially recommendations regarding the independence of the High Commissioner.

Tunisia believed the principles of impartiality and non-selectivity could only be implemented with the independence of the Office of the High Commissioner. The Human Rights Council had no supervision responsibility or mandate over the activities of the Office, and Tunisia did not understand why the Joint Inspection Unit wanted to change this and force the hand of Member States on this. The Office had a unique mandate that was not comparable to any other United Nations agency, and could not be subjected to the control of a steering body as in other structures.

Poland expressed its attachment to democracy and a free civil society. The phenomenon of restricting space for civil society and harassment against it were worrying trends. Poland was committed to creating an enabling environment for civil society and supporting its activities through cooperation with the United Nations system, the European Union and other initiatives, such as the European Endowment for Democracy. The Warsaw Dialogue for Democracy, an annual conference, allowed stakeholders to raise issues related to human rights and civil society.

Council of Europe said its Secretary General had prepared a report last year on the state of democracy in Europe. The report indicated that ethnic discrimination, detention conditions, corruption, social exclusion of the Roma community, and shortcomings in the implementation of migrants and asylum seekers’ rights were the main human rights issues in Europe. International monitoring and cooperation were crucial to address human rights concerns. Technical cooperation had to be made available to all States requiring it, and be tailored to the specific needs of the beneficiaries.

Switzerland welcomed the report on the protection of human rights in the fight against terrorism. It supported the appeal of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to the International Criminal Court to be seized with the situation in Syria. It also supported the appeal to the adhesion to the Rome Statutes and the accepting of the jurisdiction of the court for Iraq. It also welcomed that the report covered national and international surveillance activities in the fight against terrorism, noting that there was a worrying trend to place surveillance on human rights defenders.

Sudan agreed with findings of the report on the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights for all countries. The Sudanese Government helped its most vulnerable populations. It was crucial to undertake efforts to prevent violations, and more focus should be placed on international solidarity rather than condemnation. As was stated in the report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, unilateral measures and sanctions did not allow the most vulnerable countries to improve their situation.

Iran noted that the world was confronted with multiple challenges to human rights, and that solutions could be found only through international cooperation and an environment for constructive action, which did not foment confrontation. Everyone should be concerned about the challenges that the Human Rights Council faced in working to promote human rights. The Council should not be pushed to face the same criticism that was faced by its predecessor. Iran thus called for transparency, efficiency and rational use of resources.

Costa Rica said the report of the Joint Inspection Unit went beyond its mandate. Costa Rica wished to put on record its objection to the report’s approach, saying it categorically rejected Recommendation 1 that the General Assembly established a system of governance of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The suggestion that the High Commissioner was independent from the Office was not accurate, stressed Costa Rica.

Spain said it was only in the spirit of independence that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights could carry out its work effectively. Spain highlighted the report on economic, social and cultural rights, appreciating the attention given to minimum levels of social protection and how social protection floors could contribute to gender equality, particularly regarding care for persons with disabilities. Spain also appreciated the report on human rights and counter-terrorism.

Niger highlighted the importance of ensuring that activities of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights were funded by reliable budgetary resources. It appreciated the technical assistance it had received and emphasized how important that was to help States adopt the rule of law. Niger spoke about how it supported freedom of expression and the press, noting it was the first African country to sign the Table Mountain Declaration, and had decriminalized former press crimes to ensure no journalist would be imprisoned for his opinions.

Philippines said the family was a fundamental unit of society and stressed the importance of protecting it. It welcomed the report on social protection, and underlined the importance of inclusive social policies to tackle the needs of the most vulnerable persons in a society. Philippines welcomed the publication by the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights on the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights by migrants, and stressed that all migrants, regardless of their status, had to have access to social protection.

Belarus welcomed recommendations by the Joint Inspection Unit to overcome the governance problems of the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights. Belarus rejected unilateral coercive measures such as the ones imposed on Venezuela by the United States, which were a violation of human rights and an obstacle to development. They hindered the building of a democratic and just international order, and undermined the spirit of the United Nations Charter.

Uruguay said the report by the Joint Investigation Unit went further than mandated. Uruguay underlined that the independence of the Office of the High Commissioner and its teams in the field was fundamental for the implementation of its mandate. The Office and the High Commissioner were indivisible, and the Council had no mandate nor oversight over their activities. Uruguay was in favour of an appropriate geographical balance of the Office and an effective use of its resources, but in no way should this undermine its independence.

Libya noted that the escalating conflict-related challenges called for further concern and coordination. Due to grave violations of human rights, Libya reiterated that continued dialogue needed to take place in the country in order to achieve national reconciliation and transitional justice. It was a priority to enhance escalating security challenges in the country, which led to illegal migration and drug trafficking. Such occurrence required concerted regional and international actions.

Denmark expressed satisfaction with human rights being treated as a priority by Member States and welcomed the equal treatment of all human rights. Denmark raised concern about unsubstantiated comments made that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights governance did not strike an appropriate balance of work. It expressed hope that States would agree that the Human Rights Council was not a place to overrule the High Commissioner. It also condemned the killings of Christians in the Middle East.

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said that human rights encompassed all aspects of economic, social and cultural rights, and the United Nations had to address all human rights equitably. The Human Rights Council should pay more attention to the right to food and adequate housing, and Special Rapporteurs should adhere to the principles of fairness and objectivity, in the light of systemic use of the Council by Western countries to promote their own political goals. The heinous CIA torture crimes should be considered seriously at the Council.

__________________

For use of the information media; not an official record