人权理事会开展关于即审即决和针对妇女的歧视问题的互动对话（部分翻译）

人权理事会
中午

2015年6月19日

结束关于受教育权和国际团结问题的互动对话

理事会在今天中午的会议中与法外处决、即审即决或任意处决问题特别报告员克里斯托夫•海恩斯（Christof Heyns）以及法律和实践中的歧视妇女问题工作组主席艾姆纳•奥义吉（Emna Aouij）开展了集体互动对话。在会议的开始阶段，理事会结束了其与教育权问题特别报告员基肖尔•辛格（Kishore Singh）和人权与国际团结问题独立专家弗吉利亚•丹丹（Virginia Dandan）的集体互动对话。

海恩斯先生谈到了信息和通讯技术如何为保护公民和活动人士以及创新的人权监察提供机会这一问题。信息和通讯技术提高了平民目击者记录人权侵犯行为的潜力，并提供了社会问责机制。海恩斯先生还介绍了他对巴布亚新几内亚和冈比亚访问的报告以及对印度和土耳其国别建议后续行动的报告。

奥义吉女士介绍了工作组关于文化和家庭生活中的性别歧视的报告，并称性别的文化构建为歧视推波助澜且催生了家庭领域性别歧视的陈规定型，妇女在家庭中通常在多个方面遭受着父权控制和屈服。文化和宗教经常用来为针对妇女和女童的有害做法正名。必须拓展家庭的法律定义，将非传统家庭等各种家庭形式包括在内。她还介绍了工作组对智利、秘鲁和西班牙开展国家访问的报告。

智利、秘鲁和西班牙作为当事国家发言。

讨论期间，发言人都同意信息和通讯技术是揭露人权侵犯行为和保护生命权方面的积极发展。一些发言人指出了现代技术的负面因素，并强调了确保信息准确的必要性。

发言人表示了他们对于打击歧视妇女现象以及家庭背景下催生歧视和暴力的陈规定型的承诺。一些发言人强调了文化和宗教价值在打击性别歧视中的重要性。发言人对工作组提到有必要承认非传统的家庭形式持不同观点。

发言的有欧盟、代表非洲集团的阿尔及利亚、代表伊斯兰会议组织的巴基斯坦、代表拉丁美洲和加勒比地区的厄瓜多尔、叙利亚、巴西、美国、埃及、比利时、意大利、墨西哥、新西兰、荷兰、瑞士、俄罗斯联邦、伊斯兰会议组织、爱尔兰、巴拉圭、挪威、欧洲委员会、阿尔巴尼亚、博茨瓦纳、拉脱维亚、突尼斯、巴林和斯洛文尼亚。

在会议的开始阶段，理事会结束了其与教育权问题特别报告员基肖尔•辛格（Kishore Singh）和人权与国际团结问题独立专家弗吉利亚•丹丹（Virginia Dandan）的集体互动对话。与辛格先生和丹丹女士的互动对话始于6月18日，可在此查阅摘要。

讨论期间，发言人强调了受教育权、国际团结以及国际合作的重要性。他们强调了监察和规范私立教育机构以确保其并未推动弱势群体边缘化的必要性。

发言的有加纳、玻利维亚和刚果民主共和国。

发言的还有促进教育权和教育自由国际组织（International Organization for the Right to Education and Freedom of Education）、促进经济、社会和文化权利全球倡议（Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights）、计划国际（Plan International）、捍卫自由联盟（Alliance Defending Freedom）、阿尔萨拉姆基金会（Al Salam Foundation）、南美洲印第安人理事会（Indian Council of South America）、千禧运动、世界巴鲁阿组织（World Barua Organization）、希亚姆酷刑受害者康复中心（Khiam Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Torture）、阿拉伯人权委员会（Arab Commission for Human Rights）、南风发展政策协会（Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik）、胡维基金会（Al-Khoel Foundation）、教皇约翰二十三世协会（Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII）、学校促进和平世界协会（World Association for the School as an Instrument of Peace）和国际穆斯林妇女联盟（International Muslim Women’s Union）。

辛格先生在总结发言中表示，有必要规范教育的私有化。私有化可能是必需的，但在人权义务方面的问责也是必要的。确保在可持续发展目标中将消除贫困与推动教育密切关联十分重要。

丹丹女士昨天发表了总结发言。

人权理事会今天正在举行全天会议。理事会将于下午3点复会，举行其关于妇女人权年度全天讨论的第二部分，重点关注妇女赋权及其在决策中的作用。理事会将于6月22日（周一）上午9点继续关于即审即决问题和针对妇女的歧视问题的集体互动对话。

Clustered Interactive Dialogue on the Right to Education and on International Solidarity

Ghana said international solidarity and international cooperation were mutually re-enforcing. Regarding education, Ghana rejected the claim that allowing education to be commercialized constituted a violation of international human rights law. Bolivia said its constitution recognized the right to free, holistic, universal and non-discriminatory education for all, and agreed that private providers bred marginalization and dis-investment in education. Bolivia believed in the importance of continuing to raise awareness on the principles of international solidarity and ensure that international solidarity was part of the post-2015 development agenda. Democratic Republic of Congo underlined the importance of the right to education and said a programme to build new schools was being implemented, thus ensuring access to education for hundreds of children.

International Organization for the Right to Education and Freedom of Education (OIDEL), on behalf of severals NGOs1, emphasized the relevance of the distinction of providers of education and other non-governmental groups, and said the best education had to be of quality and fully respect cultural identity. Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights said that the private provisions in education often excluded the most marginalized groups. Private providers in education should thus be monitored; they should supplement rather than supplant public education. Plan International, speaking also on behalf of Arigatou International, was committed to strengthening State systems to ensure full access to public education. Education should be free and compulsory. The State had the primary role in financing the primary education system. Funding education served to promote and preserve non-discrimination. Alliance Defending Freedom stated that education should not be seen exclusively as the prerogative of the State. The rights of parents to choose what they deemed best for their children ought to be preserved. Options of home education and opting out from explicit sexual education needed to be protected.

Al Salam Foundation said that States unfortunately continued to deprive their youth prisoners of their fundamental right to education. Authorities in Bahrain’s Jau Prison regularly denied child and youth inmates serving arbitrary political sentences access to education. Indian Council of South America noted distinctions between nations and peoples and civil society. If norms of international solidarity were put in place, they would allow for the self-determination of peoples, the fundamental principle which was provided for in the United Nations Charter. Jubilee Campaign, also on behalf of Christian Solidarity Worldwide, remained concerned about discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities and the spread of stereotype images against them in schools. In Myanmar, Rohingya children were stripped of their right to higher education as their ethnic group was deemed stateless.

World Barua Organization said that education was a contributor to awareness about human rights and was concerned that this universal right was denied to many in Indian society, particularly to low castes and minorities. Khiam Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Torture said in a joint statement that recent demonstrations in Bahrain had led to the arrest of hundreds of students for political reasons, while the Teachers Union had been dissolved in 2011 and a number of teachers had been dismissed or imprisoned. Arab Commission for Human Rights said that education did not foster high quality social inclusion, particularly in Africa and in Asia, where it was opened to the most affluent. What measures could be taken to encourage countries to sign the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Convention on eradicating all forms of discrimination in education? Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik said that in Iran, only 67 per cent of school aged children were in school, while poverty, lack of adequate schools and adequate school facilities, and distances between homes and schools contributed to high drop-out rates.

Al-Khoei Foundation highlighted the situation of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, whose discrimination led to statelessness and restricted their right to work, study, travel, marry and practice their religions. It also raised concerns over the situation in Yemen and the atrocities there.

Associazione Communita Papa Giovanni XXIII, on behalf of severals NGOs2, said international solidarity would be a powerful tool to address global human rights concerns, and underlined the necessity to recognize the right of individuals and people to international solidarity. Pope Francis had affirmed the necessity of a new mind-set that put people at the forefront of societies. World Association for the School as an Instrument of Peace raised concerns about the human rights situation in Lao People’s Democratic Republic, and demanded that the Council, during the Universal Periodic Review, called on Lao People’s Democratic Republic to ensure free and fair elections. International Muslim Women’s Union raised concerns about access to education in Indian-Occupied Kashmir due to the militarization of the region. Students there were subjected to religious profiling.

Concluding Remarks

KISHORE SINGH, Special Rapporteur on the right to education, in concluding remarks said that all the comments sent by Algeria had been integrally incorporated in his report. Bhutan was praised for developing and promoting the gross national happiness index. There was no doubt that, both in terms of law and policy, there was a need to regulate the privatization of education. Privatization might be necessary, but accountability in terms of human rights obligations was also necessary; education should not be treated as a commodity. Primary school level education was the key responsibility of the State. Mr. Singh shared the concern of the European Union on the provision of education in post-conflict areas. It was very clear that the proposals submitted for the sustainable development agenda stressed free, equitable and inclusive education for all. The core responsibility of the State was not emphasized enough. The human rights based approach needed to be taken with regard to development and education. It was very important, Mr. Singh stressed, to ensure that poverty elimination was closely tied to the promotion of education in the sustainable development agenda. Education was truly central in the future agenda.

Mr. Singh said that there was not enough emphasis on skills development. Institutional cooperation was necessary to bring in enterprises with the view of developing skills of students wherever they were needed. Norway provided a good example of education as a public good. In keeping with the Paris Principles, the minimum four to six percent of the gross domestic product needed to be dedicated to education. The report focused on private providers of education, which were not controlled by Governments and oriented on making profit. If profit was made, it should be invested in school development and social causes. A number of positive examples had been provided of how public and private education could co-exist with the interests of children in mind, and without being guided by profits. Education needed to continue to be promoted as a public and social good. Private institutions should be prohibited from hiring unqualified teachers.

Documentation

The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (A/HRC/29/37)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions on the Mission to Papua New Guinea (A/HRC/29/37/Add.1)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions on the Mission to Gambia (A/HRC/29/37/Add.2)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions on the Follow-up to country recommendations to India (A/HRC/29/37/Add.3)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions on the Follow-up to country recommendations to Turkey (A/HRC/29/37/Add.4)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions on Observations on communications (A/HRC/29/37/Add.5)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (A/HRC/29/37/Add.6)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (A/HRC/29/37/Add.7)

The Council has before it the report of the Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice (A/HRC/29/40)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice on the Mission to Chile (A/HRC/29/40/Add.1 – Spanish only)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice on the Mission to Peru (A/HRC/29/40/Add.2)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice on the Mission to Spain (A/HRC/29/40/Add.3)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice – comments by Chile (A/HRC/29/40/Add.4)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice – comments by Peru (A/HRC/29/40/Add.5)

The Council has before it an addendum to the report of the Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice – comments by Spain (: A/HRC/29/40/Add.6)

Presentations by the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial and Summary Executions and the Working Group on Discrimination against Women in Law and in Practice

CHRISTOF HEYNS, Special Rapporteur on extra-judicial, summary or arbitrary executions, introducing his reports, said that his annual report considered the question of how information and communication technologies could be used to secure the right to life. Information so harnessed could be used to assist investigations or secure accountability, and offered certain opportunities to protect citizens and activists. Various organizations were developing alert applications that defenders, journalists and others could use to send a signal that they were in danger, such as a “panic button” developed by Amnesty International. The amount of information available to be analysed in the digital space offered an opportunity for innovative human rights monitoring in a similar way that was sometimes used in crisis response. A dearth of information could contribute to impunity, and many human rights violations could be committed not because perpetrators believed they were justifiable, but because they believed that they would not be called to justice. Technologies had increased the potential for documentation of human rights violations by civilian witnesses. Information and communication technologies also offered mechanisms of social accountability that citizens could use to hold States and others to account, and social media had created a wealth of opportunities for civilians to highlight human rights violations they had witnessed. It was important to note that information and communication technologies could not foster accountability on their own, and it could not be expected that all human rights violations left a digital footprint, but new technology had the potential to greatly enhance the chance that perpetrators of violations were brought to account.

Mr. Heyns also presented his reports on missions to Papua New Guinea and Gambia, and on the follow-up to recommendations on India and Turkey. Papua New Guinea had taken many formal steps to ensure the protection of human rights and the right to life, but they were not properly implemented. There was a need to establish a national human rights institution, encourage the establishment of human rights non-governmental organizations, while larger and better trained police would strengthen the certainty of conviction for criminal offences. The Special Rapporteur expressed his concern about the imposition of the death penalty and the resumption of executions in Gambia, impunity for extra-judicial executions, lack of accountability for human rights violations, and others. The human rights situation in Gambia was grave and unless dramatic changes were made, the situation would deteriorate even further.

EMNA AOUIJ, Chair of the Working Group on the Issue of Discrimination Against Women in Law and in Practice, presented the Working Group’s report on gender discrimination in cultural and family life, and started with reaffirming all States’ obligation to take all necessary measures to eliminate discrimination against women by both public and private actors. Discrimination in the cultural and family life persisted, she said. Gender cultural construction facilitated discrimination and created sexist stereotypes everywhere, particularly in the family sphere, where the role of women was generally subjected to patriarchal control and submission on several aspects, including marriage consent, childcare, divorce and inheritance. The lack of gender equality in the family made women and girls vulnerable to domestic violence, including incest and domestic rape. States had the obligation to prohibit and punish such acts, and to set measures to assist the victims. Culture and religion were often used to justify harmful practices against women and girls, such as forced marriage, female genital mutilation or honour crimes. Cultural and religious patriarchate was a major source of economic inequalities and led to poverty for women. Culture or religion could not justify either discrimination or violence against women. It was crucial to protect the family as the basic unit of society in a way that respected and protected the rights of women. Ms. Aouij called for the withdrawal of reservations made to articles 2, 5 and 16 of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. The legal definition of the family had to be extended and include the different forms of families, including non-traditional ones. Discriminatory forms of marriage, including temporary marriages, forced marriages or polygamist marriages had to be prohibited.

The Chair then presented reports on the country visits to Chile, Peru and Spain conducted by the Working Group. On Chile, she welcomed constitutional and legislative reforms undertaken by the government, including political quotas, measures to eradicate violence against women and the legalization of abortion in certain circumstances. Concerns remained regarding women’s lack of political representation and access to labour, as well as regarding discrimination in access to health and the current criminalization of abortion in all cases. With regard to Peru, the Working Group welcomed considerable efforts to strengthen the legal framework relating to the rights of women, but remained preoccupied by the grave economic consequences that extraction activities had on indigenous women. The Group also raised concerns about women’s lack of access to sexual and reproductive services. Regarding the Working Group’s visit to Spain, she commended the advanced legal framework relating to combatting discrimination against women. She noted however that the combination of sexism and austerity restricted many women to traditional roles. Spain should conduct evaluations on the impact of austerity measures on gender issues.

Statements by Concerned Countries

Chile, speaking as a concerned country, welcomed the fact that the Working Group acknowledged the work done by Chile in order to eradicate gender-based violence, reform conjugal relations, and legislate the voluntary interruption of early pregnancies, among other issues. There still existed various forms of discrimination affecting women in Chile in social, economic and political spheres. The creation of the Ministry of Women and Gender Equality aimed to strengthen policies focusing on eliminating gender discrimination. Chile agreed that the participation of women in various economic and social processes would help foster profound cultural change and remove the causes of gender inequality. It noted that the equality of women in family was closely linked with the enjoyment of their rights in other spheres, such as public political, social and economic life.

Peru, speaking as a concerned country, said since Peru had issued a standing invitation to the Special Procedures in 2002, it had received 12 mandate holders visits carried out on the basis of constructive dialogue. The visit of the Working Group on discrimination against women in law and in practise was the exception to this rule. Peru had never interacted with a Special Procedure whose report did not reflect the reality on the ground. The report had not checked the truth behind claims made and made recommendations outside of the Working Group’s mandate. The highest national authorities in Peru had stated that the report contained a number of inappropriate recommendations and inaccuracies. The Government had had to submit a written response with comments. Among the most worrying issues in the report was the fact that the rights of indigenous women were not properly reflected. Peru was one of only 22 countries that had ratified International Labour Organization convention 169 on indigenous and tribal peoples, and indigenous women in Peru enjoyed the highest level of legal protection. Furthermore, the highest consideration for the customs and culture of indigenous people was ensured in the law. Regarding the Working Group formulating recommendations beyond its mandate, in paragraph 86 (d), it recommended that Peru include sexual orientation and gender identity as protected categories by law. As far as Peru knew, no Special Procedure had the mandate to talk about sexual orientation.

Spain, speaking as a concerned country, expressed appreciation for the readiness of the Working Group to study the complexity of the law and institutional architecture in the country. Achieving full equality was a long road, but Spain had made considerable progress so far. Gender-based violence was the most serious expression of inequalities. A pioneering data collection system on violence had been in place for several years, and several national institutions had recognized that Spain was one of the few countries with official statistics on gender-based violence. Spain was actively pursuing a zero tolerance policy with regard to gender-based violence. Economic crisis had adversely impacted female employment, and Spain reiterated its commitment to continue to take measures to improve the participation of women, including in the economic sphere. Spain disagreed with the characterisation of its society by the Working Group as “macho” and congratulated the Working Group on their analysis of families.

Interactive Dialogue

European Union noted the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation to States to respect the individual’s right to record a public event which was an important protection for activists. The European Union joined the call of the Working Group to guarantee women’s rights, including with respect to equality in family and to recognize various forms of families that existed in practice today. Algeria, speaking on behalf of the African Group, emphasized the need to establish appropriate accountability and reporting mechanisms on national, regional and international levels, and warned against over-emphasis of the use of information and communication technologies. The African Group urged the international community to respect cultural diversity and cultural norms that aimed at protecting women's rights as a recognized vulnerable group of society and recognized the crucial role of the family in this regard.

Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, said the verification of user-generated content was fundamental to reaping the advantages of information and communication technologies in terms of broadening access to and the scope of human rights work. Efforts should be made by the international community to eliminate all social and cultural barriers and harmful practices which discriminated against women and girls. Ecuador, speaking on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean Countries, recognized the importance of ensuring the greatest gender equality through public policies and awareness raising, and expressed its commitment to strengthen women’s economic situation and mainstream gender equality in all public policies. It appreciated the Working Group’s recognition of the different forms of families. Syria said modern technologies could also lead to violations of the right to life, and the dissemination of undocumented information was one of the greatest challenges of the digital era. Syria asked how to check that divulgated satellite imagery by developed countries was impartial?
Brazil congratulated the Working Group for recognizing that families existed in a variety of forms, and underlined the importance of the rights of women from all forms of families to be respected. Brazil recognized that the use of information and communication technologies could lead to additional risks to human rights defenders, and agreed that the use of satellite imagery should be cross-referenced with other sources of information.

United States said the Special Rapporteur’s report raised interesting questions on the use of technology in relation to the protection of human rights, as well as thought provoking observations on the intersection of culture, religion, law and ingrained gender discrimination. The United States asked the Working Group to provide best practices that States could use to promote an understanding of women as equal participants in society.
Egypt noted that the Working Group’s approaches to discrimination issues were based on benchmarks beyond many States’ obligations under international human rights law. It also reflected a high degree of insensitivity and lack of understanding towards cultural and legal diversity around the world, and it used controversial concepts that lacked universal consensus and basis in international law. Belgium supported the recommendation of the Special Rapporteur to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to appoint a specialist in digital evidence in order to assist in making the best use of information and communications technologies. It noted that States had to act as an agent of change as regards women’s place in cultural and family life by fostering and creating a culture free of all forms of discrimination. Italy asked the President of the Working Group to elaborate on how States could act as agents for change and how to secure a transformative approach to the status of women and girls within the family. It asked the Special Rapporteur to expand on the role that technology corporations could have in preventing violations of the right to life.

Mexico agreed that eradicating discrimination against women was a State’s obligation regardless of whether it occurred in public or private spheres. What good practices existed about raising awareness of women’s contribution to cultural life and how could media be used to change stereotypes about women’s roles? New Zealand recognized that cultural practices were a risk factor in discrimination against women and said that successful prevention programmes needed to be steeped in cultural values of local communities. Families and communities could indeed be a harmful environment, but at their best they were fundamentally helpful. Netherlands remained concerned about the harmful effects that gender stereotypes and historical inequalities still had on societies and called on all States to continuously review domestic laws and policies for discriminatory effects. The Working Group had called attention to the need to reform discriminatory family laws. Switzerland expressed support for the progressive definition of the family proposed by the Working Group and shared its concern about cultural relativism and its inclusion in Human Rights Council resolutions that protected the family.

Russian Federation was concerned about the Working Group ignoring the code of conduct and hoped it would stick to its terms of reference. Russia was also concerned about the choice of information and communication technologies as a theme by the Special Rapporteur, as it was artificial and unjustified. Organization of Islamic Cooperation expressed concern about the reference to diverse families by the Working Group on discrimination against women, which was a contradiction of the definition provided for in international human rights standards. Ireland noted the links between the report by the Special Rapporteur on summary executions, focusing on information and communication technologies, and the recent report by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression, focusing on encryption and anonymity. Ireland asked the Chair of the Working Group to elaborate on efforts by the Working Group to address the issue of discrimination against lesbian and transgender women. Paraguay said the main obstacles to increasing political participation of women were linked to negative cultural stereotypes. Paraguay had created training and awareness raising for law enforcement personnel to address the fact that violence against women was under-reported.

Norway welcomed the Working Group’s understanding that the legal definition of the family in national legislation should be extended to recognize different forms of family, such as same-sex couples. It also noted its call for the elimination of practices that discriminated against women regardless of the legal system, religion, custom or tradition. Council of Europe supported the recommendations of the Working Group, in particular the need to recognize gender equality, combat gender stereotypes and to facilitate women’s access to decision-making positions and policy-making processes. It noted that guaranteed equal access to justice was of particular importance in the advancement of women’s position. Albania stressed the importance of due diligence by States and the risks of the use of digital evidence in the investigation of extra judiciary, summary and arbitrary executions. As for discrimination against women, Albania emphasized that States had to act in order to prevent any such practices. Botswana noted that patriarchy as well as religious, customary and indigenous laws, norms and cultural practices continued to perpetuate gender-based discrimination and violence against women and girls. It reiterated that States had to act as an agent of change in all national, regional and international efforts to promote gender equality and women’s empowerment.

Latvia said that women’s right to equality must be protected regardless of legal systems, together with their access to justice, and asked about examples of best practices on the engagement of women in redrafting discriminatory laws. Tunisia confirmed that almost all recommendations that the Working Group had made following its visit to Tunisia two years ago had been implemented or were being implemented, including revising all legislation to remove all discriminatory provisions. Bahrain firmly believed in the principle of equality between men and women; this principle was found in a number of Government policies and programmes, which made women key partners in political and economic life. Slovenia urged States to criminalize all forms of domestic violence; it was of utmost importance to prohibit and punish violence including incest, marital rape and intimate partner violence and provide measures to protect women and girls who were victims of such violence.

Response

CHRISTOF HEYNS, Special Rapporteur on extra-judicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said that the right to life had two components: one was prevention of arbitrary killing, the other was accountability. On the need to be cautious on the utilization of modern technologies, the Special Rapporteur agreed that information and communication technologies could be used both in a favourable or a negative way. A key element was the ability to distinguish between authentic and fake material. Sources had to remain confidential in order to protect them from reprisals. He then echoed the position of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression in stressing the importance of making encryption and anonymity tools available. He also encouraged body-worn cameras, but warned against the possibility to misuse them.

EMNA AOUIJ, Chair of the Working Group on Discrimination against Women, thanked the countries that were visited for their valuable contribution. She noted that the universality of rights was enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which meant that all individuals had the right to fully enjoy their rights. Different forms of family were important and required adapted care by States. The Working Group made such recommendations to States, in line with international and regional human rights tools. In the report, the Group reminded that the right to equality of women and men was not taken up in relevant resolutions and was not mentioned in the concept note of the roundtable on that theme. The Group recommended that the Council recognize the right to equality between men and women, and boys and girls in all its resolutions. It should also consider the adoption of measures against States that discriminated on the basis of gender. The Group established that discriminatory practices had to be eliminated regardless of different cultural and religious contexts. The use of cultural relativism in order to contest the universality of rights was problematic. The Working Group recalled that there was a primacy of the rights of women and girls over cultural and religious precepts.

___________


1Joint statement: International Organization for the Right to Education and Freedom of Education (OIDEL), International Catholic Child Bureau, International Organization for the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, Women’s Board Educational Cooperative Society, Institute for Planetary Synthesis, New Humanity, Catholic International Education Office, Planetary Association for Clean Energy Inc, The Dominicans for Justice and Peace (Order of Preachers), Congregation of our Lady of Charity of the Good Sherpherd, Servas International, International Catholic Child Bureau, Foundation for GAIA, Association Points-Coeur, Associazione Communita Papa Giovanni XXIII, and Fondazione Marista per la Solidarieta Internazionale (ONLUS.


2Joint statement: Associazione Communita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Pax Christi International, International Catholic Peace Movement, Foundation for GAIA, Planetary Association for Clean Energy Inc, The Edmund Rice International Limited, Congregation of our Lady of Charity of the Good Sherpherd, International Organization for the Right to Education and Freedom of Education (OIDEL), and Pax Romana (ICMICA and IMCS).

____________
For use of the information media; not an official record

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