SPECIAL PROCEDURES ON RIGHT TO HEALTH, TO FOOD AND TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION PRESENT REPORTS TO HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

The Human Rights Council this afternoon heard presentation of reports from the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, the Special Rapporteur on the right to food and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression.

At the beginning of the meeting, the Council concluded its interactive dialogue with the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances, the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography and the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Paul Hunt, Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, said that the right to health was a complex and extensive matter. The right to health demanded accountability with a view to identifying what worked and what did not. Every year millions suffered horrific, avoidable pain and very few had access to pain relieving drugs. As always, those in the developing world suffered much more than those in the developed world. The reports on the right to health should be considered not only by the Human Rights Council, but also the World Health Assembly and WHO’s Executive Board. The Council should look closely at maternal mortality as a human rights issue. He also noted that funding for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had increased in recent years but funding for Special Procedures remained a huge problem.

Jean Ziegler, Special Rapporteur on the right to food, said that the right to food was massively violated, and the situation got worse from year to year. The number of people suffering from hunger had increased every year since 1996, reaching an estimated 854 million people despite commitments from Governments. Yet, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the world already produced enough food to feed every child, woman and man and could feed double the current world population. How could they accept that 6 million children under five were killed every year by malnutrition and related illnesses? All human beings had the right to live in dignity, free from hunger. There were currently three major problems affecting the right to food: the explosion of the price of food worldwide; the donor crisis in providing international humanitarian assistance; and those who were fleeing their countries because of the dumping policies of some Governments.

Ambeyi Ligabo, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, said the freedom of opinion and expression was a fundamental human right and a foundation of democracy. The respect of the free circulation of ideas and opinions was a reliable indicator of how much a society respected all other human rights. Unfortunately, violations of this right continued to occur all over the world. To overcome these challenges, concerted and deliberate efforts by the international community would be required. All over the world journalists continued to be harassed, threatened and killed. The Internet had been severely curtailed in many countries. Narrowing the digital divide required more than technological skills; it demanded a new type of education, one that empowered people to be more than spectators, but active players.

Speaking as concerned countries in response to the above reports were Uganda, Colombia, Ecuador, Sweden, Bolivia, Cuba, Ukraine and Azerbaijan.

Speaking in the interactive dialogue this afternoon on the reports were the delegations of Qatar, on behalf of the Arab Group, Palestine on behalf of the League of Arab States, India, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Algeria, Egypt on behalf of the African Group and in a national capacity, the Holy See, Indonesia, Cuba, Brazil, China, Uruguay and Lesotho.

Santiago Corcuera Cabezut, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances, in concluding remarks, said that with regard to the comments of El Salvador, the Working Group acknowledged the difficulties the State had in looking for disappeared persons and recognized the efforts undertaken by the State to look for missing children, although it would like to see that applied to all missing persons regardless of age. It was noted that disappearances were a crime of the present and not of the past. The Working Group wished to apologize to Nepal and the Philippines for the errors that were contained in the report.

Juan Miguel Petit, Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, in concluding remarks, said that international cooperation was very important in protecting children from trafficking, with regard to monitoring borders and in other ways. There were four pillars in a prevention policy: action of law enforcement, police and others responsible for public security needs; communication and raising awareness of citizens; justice; and specific programmes, including educational programmes, explaining where the problems lay, and generating awareness and an alert system. There was also an important question on how to put in place a culture to stop this kind of crime. For that two things were needed: first, legal standards; and, second, values.

Manfred Nowak, Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in concluding remarks, said that he was grateful for all the remarks on his work on the strengthening of the protection of women; it was clear that there was a discriminatory element if there was prostitution combined with trafficking. He noted that he had a fruitful meeting with the Human Rights Vice Minister of Iraq this morning and it was agreed that he would carry out a mission to Iraq in early autumn. On his postponed visit to Russia, he was waiting for the Russians to send their invitation. On Zimbabwe, he was confident that he would be able to carry out a mission in the near future after he had a very constructive meeting with the Minister of Justice last week. He was hopeful to visit Ecuador and Guinea in October.

The Special Procedures on enforced disappearances, sale of children and torture presented their reports on 10 March in the afternoon, and held an interactive dialogue on them this morning. For further details, see press release HRC/08/19 of 11 March and HRC/08/18 of 10 March.

When the Council reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 12 March, it will continue with its interactive dialogue on the reports on the right to enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical health, the right to food and the right to freedom of opinion and expression.


Concluding Remarks by Special Procedures on Enforced Disappearances, Sale of Children and Torture

SANTIAGO CORCUERA CABEZUT, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, in concluding remarks, said, regarding the questions posed by Honduras, the Working Group was convinced that there must first be an acknowledgement of the problems, as Honduras had proved. The Working Group was pleased that Honduras was taking steps to criminalize crimes of enforced disappearances in keeping with international laws and norms. The Working Group was also pleased to see that the State had ratified the new Convention on Enforced Disappearances and other conventions. The identification of missing persons was also commendable. With regard to the comments of El Salvador, the Working Group acknowledged the difficulties the State had in looking for disappeared persons and recognized the efforts undertaken by the State in looking for missing children, although it would like to see that applied to all missing persons regardless of age. Implementation of the Working Group’s recommendations would be of great help to the State in its task. It was noted that disappearances were a crime of the present and not of the past. The Working Group wished to apologize to Nepal and the Philippines for the errors that were contained in the report. The Working Group had to make sure that its reports were credible. As to the question posed by the European Union, through Slovenia, the Working Group had revised its methodology and overhauled them to ensure they were in line with the new code of conduct. With regard to a register, the Working Group took care to ensure that actions were taken to contain any possible intimidation against those who made these reports of alleged disappearances. To prevent impunity, the Working Group needed to believe that no measures should be taken equivalent of a legal or de facto amnesty. As to countries honestly attempting to resolve cases of forced disappearances, they should revise their working methodology as there were other ways of going about closing cases. This was possible as long as appropriate reparations in terms of justice and appropriate access to honesty were respected.

JUAN MIGUEL PETIT, Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, thanked States for their suggestions and support. Palestine on behalf of the Arab Group had noted that international cooperation was very important in protecting children from trafficking, with regard to monitoring borders and in other ways. Responding to a question from Pakistan, there were four pillars in a prevention policy: action of law enforcement, police and others responsible for public security needed to investigate criminals; communication and raising awareness of citizens; justice; and specific programmes, including educational programmes, explaining where the problems lay, and to generate awareness and an alert system. Liechtenstein and the European Union had both commented on international cooperation and what current means were available in that regard. There were conditions under which international cooperation could help to carry out specific tasks, for example training of special education teachers. There was also an important question on how to put in place a culture to stop this kind of crime. For that two things were needed: first, legal standards; and, second, values – spiritual values, consciousness and citizenship values. How could human rights be promoted? That could be done through schools or institutions, for example education programmes would teach people not to be afraid of discussing such issues. They also needed to promote a culture of tolerance.

Mr. Petit acknowledged a comment, saying he also felt it was important to think about the relationship of the expert on violence against children and his mandate. The two mandates were complementary, and they could develop a shared agenda for issues that needed to be addressed and perhaps undertake country visits together. No one should fear the denouncing of such cases. The more those cases came to light, the better they could be tackled. Iran was thanked for its comments on non-governmental organizations with regard to transparency. It was important that non-governmental organizations self-regulated.

MANFRED NOWAK, Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in concluding remarks, thanked Governments of Paraguay, Togo and Sri Lanka for their collaboration and willingness to implement his recommendations. The international community was asked to provide help to these countries in the field of the administration of justice, police and prison reform. Nigeria was asked to provide more information on the fate of prisoners on death row that the President had promised to release. The critical comments by Indonesia were surprising after the very cooperative spirit; he looked forward to the continuation of good cooperation from the Government of Indonesia. He noted that he had a fruitful meeting with the Human Rights Vice Minister of Iraq this morning and it was agreed that he would carry out a mission to Iraq in early autumn. On his postponed visit to Russia, he was waiting for the Russians to send their invitation. On Zimbabwe, he was confident that he would be able to carry out a mission in the near future after he had a very constructive meeting with the Minister of Justice last week. He was hopeful to visit Ecuador and Guinea in October. He was grateful for all the remarks on his work on the strengthening of the protection of women from torture; it was clear that there was a discriminatory element if there was prostitution combined with trafficking. On the voluntary fund for torture, women should be treated in rehabilitation centres funded by this fund. In his next report he would deal with disabled persons. On Paraguay, the country had developed a prevention mechanism that went beyond what was required by the Optional Protocol of the Convention against Torture. On Zimbabwe, he was very encouraged by the active civil society and the functioning judicial means in relation to torture that he was told about. Children should spend as little time as possible in prison. Also, every national preventive mechanism should include a balanced representation of men and women among doctors and psychiatrists. Pregnant women should be given non-custodial measures, they should be released as much as possible, and mothers with young children should have special facilities for children in prisons.

Reports on Right to Health, to Food and to Freedom of Opinion and Expression

The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Paul Hunt (A/HRC/7/11 and Add.1-4), which says there is a growing recognition that a strong health system is an essential element of a healthy and equitable society. However, health systems in many countries are failing and collapsing. The report briefly identifies some of the historical landmarks in the development of health systems. Taking into account health good practices, as well as the right to the highest attainable standard of health, the report then identifies a general approach to strengthening health systems, which should be applied, consistently and systematically, across the numerous “building blocks” that together constitute a functioning health system. A chapter of the report also looks at how the right to health helps to establish a health system in the same way as the right to a fair trial helps to establish a court system. Among the report's conclusions are that those responsible for strengthening health systems should recognize the importance of human rights, and they should embark on the integration of the right to the highest attainable standard into their work. [Addendums one through four are currently unavailable.]

The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Jean Ziegler (A/HRC/7/5 and Add.1-3), which says, despite real advances in countries such as China, India, South Africa, and several Latin American and Caribbean countries, there has been little progress overall in reducing the number of victims of hunger and malnutrition around the world. The number of people suffering from hunger has increased every year since 1996, reaching an estimated 854 million people despite Government commitments to halve hunger. Yet, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the world already produces enough food to feed double the current world population. A key remaining problem is the lack of coherence within the United Nations system, in particular the way in which the policies and practices of agencies such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank undermine protection of the right to food. State policies show similar patterns of inconsistency. Particular attention has to be given to the protection of the right to food for disadvantaged groups, especially women and indigenous people. States are recommended to ensure that their international political and economic policies do not have negative impacts on the right to food in other countries; to improve the international supervisory mechanisms for transnational corporations to ensure they respect the right to food; to establish a five-year moratorium on all initiatives to develop biofuels that aim to convert food into fuel; and to strengthen protection mechanisms for people forced to leave their homes and lands because of hunger. [Addendums one and three currently unavailable.]

Addendum two contains the report of the Special Rapporteur's mission to Bolivia, which notes that the vast majority of Bolivia's people remain poor and malnourished, and chronic malnutrition affects more than one in four Bolivian children. Around 35 per cent of Bolivians, mostly indigenous peoples, live in extreme poverty, and cannot afford the minimum amount of calories needed every day to sustain a healthy life. December 2005 marked the beginning of a new era as Bolivians elected Evo Morales Ayma, the first indigenous President in Latin America, who has publicly committed to make the fight against malnutrition, food insecurity, and poverty the key element of his agenda. His administration is adopting a “Zero Malnutrition Programme” as well as programmes focused on investing in small-scale agriculture, food sovereignty, land reform, social infrastructure and protecting the rights of indigenous peoples. Recommendations include the adoption of the new Constitution, recognizing the right to food; the entrenchment of the right to food through the adoption of framework laws, identifying concrete goals and monitoring mechanisms; and priority for elimination of slave-like conditions of bonded labour.

The Council has before it a note verbale dated 26 February 2008 from the Permanent Mission of Cuba addressed to the Human Rights Council secretariat (A/HRC/7/G/5), transmitting the observations of the Government of Cuba on the report of the visit to Cuba of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food.

The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom
of opinion and expression, Ambeyi Ligabo (A/HRC/7/14 and Add.1-3), which reviews the main activities of the Special Rapporteur undertaken in 2007, including an analysis of communication trends during that period. Chapter II presents an overall review of the main issues addressed by the Special Rapporteur throughout his mandate, specifically in the realms of the right to access to information, safety and the protection of media professionals, legal restrictions to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the impact of freedom of expression on the realization of other human rights. Section III presents the general conclusions and recommendations of the Special Rapporteur, including that States adopt legislation that unambiguously prohibits all forms of censorship in media outlets, and urging them to extend measures to protect freedom of opinion and expression to the Internet; and urging media professionals to be conscious of the potential impact that the ideas they express may have in raising cultural and religious sensitivities.

[Addendum one is currently not available.]

Addendum two contains a report of the mandate holder's 2007 official visit to Ukraine, where he finds that, in spite of improvements, the overall state of the right to freedom of opinion and expression is still not in line with the spirit and the contents of international human rights standards. A number of journalists and other professionals have been victims of violence by gangs and informal groups allegedly linked to some State security organs. Furthermore, many journalists are under severe pressure and intimidation from local authorities and are often brought to justice and judged with great severity. Conversely, undue delays in the determination of cases of violence against journalists are common and perpetrators have frequently not been brought to justice. Proliferation of unprofessional publications and dependence on political and economic lobbies are among the most notable deficiencies in the media environment. The advocacy of racial and ethnic hatred – aggravated by beatings, physical assaults and murders perpetrated against foreigners, including diplomats, foreign students, and migrants – is a worrying trend. The quality of journalism needs to be improved through adequate training in media ethics, and on the importance of respecting human rights; and the activities of various institutional organs entrusted with the responsibility over matters related to broadcasting and dissemination of information should be rationalized.

A third addendum presents the report of the Special Rapporteur's 2007 mission to Azerbaijan, which records that the media environment in the country is marked by various problems. Current laws concerning defamation, libel and insult are not in line with the increasing trend towards decriminalization of related offences, and courts tend to be particularly severe in judging journalists and other media professionals who have sometimes been victims of repression, including violence and persecution, by law enforcement officials. The Ministry of Justice should review several court decisions, which have created a widespread sense of fear and self-censorship among journalists, thus diminishing their editorial freedom. A swift revision of the current legislation on the media to make it fully compatible with international standards would be a first step forward. In further recommendations, the Government and relevant national bodies are urged to regard action against impunity of crimes targeting media professionals and opinion makers as one of the main priorities of democratic evolution.

Presentation of Reports on Right to Health, to Food and to Freedom of Opinion and Expression

PAUL HUNT, Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, stated that the right to health was complex and extensive encompassing medical care and the underlying determinants of health, such as water, sanitation, non-discrimination and equality. The right to health demanded accountability with a view to identifying what worked and what did not. Every year millions suffered horrific, avoidable pain and very few had access to pain relieving drugs. As always, those in the developing world suffered much more than those in the developed world. The right to health was subject to progressive realization. The right to health could not be realized without the interventions and insights of health workers. It could not be realized without the expertise of those working in medicine and public health. If the Council was serious about implementing the right to health, it was absolutely imperative that more health workers engaged with human rights. Also, more human rights workers had to be willing to learn about health. The Special Rapporteur suggested that the reports on the right to health should be considered not only by the Human Rights Council, but also the World Health Assembly and WHO’s Executive Board. States were urged to take the steps to mainstream human rights in their health-related national and international policy-making.

Mr. Hunt said one way for the Human Rights Council to encourage such mainstreaming was by holding a special session – or thematic panel – on a right to health issue of global importance, such as maternal mortality and Millennium Development Goal 5. It was hoped that the Council would look closely at maternal mortality as a human rights issue, either during a regular session, or in a thematic special session. At the heart of the right to health lay an effective and integrated health system that was accessible to all. Yet in many countries, health systems were failing and collapsing, the Special Rapporteur noted. The report in question endeavored to marry health good practices and the right to the highest attainable standard of health. It also identified a general right to health approach to strengthening health systems. The report argued that this general right to health approach should be applied to the six building blocks that, according to the WHO, together constituted a functioning health system – building blocks like the health workforce, health information systems and health financing. Moreover, the report also argued that, just as the right to a fair trial had helped to strengthen court systems, so the right to health could help to strengthen health systems.

As regard to country visits, the Special Rapporteur noted that, during the period under review, he had visited Sweden. Sweden had some very impressive international policies on development, poverty reduction and human rights. They were among the best in the world. Also, the Special Rapporteur visited Uganda to examine how Sweden contributed to the realization of the right to health in Uganda. The international right to health was subject to international assistance and cooperation. International law gave rise to some human rights responsibilities of international and cooperation in health. The report outlined the contours and content of these human rights responsibilities of international and cooperation in health. The Council also had before it preliminary notes following the mission of the Special Rapporteur to Ecuador, Colombia and India, conducted in May, September and November-December last year, respectively. The Special Rapporteur also repeated his profound concern about the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip. The health situation was worse than had been previously reported. Today, waste-water treatment plants were near collapse, hospitals could not function properly, and medical supplies and services were obstructed.

In conclusion, the Special Rapporteur noted that he continued to receive comments on the draft Human Rights Guidelines for Pharmaceutical Companies in Relation to Access to Medicines, which he had written, and discussed with the Third Committee, last year. While noting that funding for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had increased in recent years funding for Special Procedures remained a huge problem.

JEAN ZIEGLER, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to food, said that the right to food was massively violated, and the situation got worse from year to year. The number of people suffering from hunger had increased every year since 1996, reaching an estimated 854 million people despite commitments by Governments at the 2002 World Food Summit and at the 2000 Millennium Summit to eradicate hunger. The number of those who were suffering from chronic malnutrition, for example, had risen by 12 million from 2006 to 2007 alone. Yet, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the world already produced enough food to feed every child, woman and man and could feed double the current world population. How could they accept that 6 million children under five were killed every year by malnutrition and related illnesses? All human beings had the right to live in dignity, free from hunger.

There were currently three major problems affecting the right to food, Mr. Ziegler said. First, the explosion of the price of food worldwide. In December 2007, the FAO cereal price index had averaged 210, up 41 per cent from December 2006. A large number of African countries, even in a good year, had to import food because of insufficient harvests. Last year, African countries had imported $5 billion dollars worth of wheat, but they would have to pay $8 billion for the same amount this year. Many countries just did not have that money.

A second problem was the donor crisis in international humanitarian assistance. The World Food Programme did not have enough funds to carry out all of its programmes; it had a 45 per cent shortfall in its budget. That meant it would have to either drop off a lot of people from its list of those needing food support, or it would have to make an across the board reduction in the amount of food it provided to each person. That was directly linked to rising food prices, which was in turn tied to increasing production of biofuels. By 2010, the United States alone expected to produce 140 billion litres of bioethanol. That was a total violation of the right to food. Just filling up one tank with bioethanol required 352 kilos of maize. Brazil was a separate case, as it was providing small farmers with programmes and compensation. The Special Rapporteur called for a five-year moratorium on biofuel production, until they had learned how to transform food waste into fuel.

A third concern affecting the right to food was those who were fleeing their countries because of the dumping policies of some Governments, Mr. Ziegler said. Last year had seen an explosion in illegal entries on the southern border of Europe. There was a clear protection gap on three categories of refugees seeking asylum, but food refugees had no international protection at all. The human rights mechanisms should create an instrument for that purpose to require non-refoulement for those fleeing hunger. Academia and civil society had established extraterritorial obligations of States, for example, to respect the right to food, health and education, not just within their territories, but outside them. That was where there was a huge gap, where Western countries, like Switzerland, did not vote to support those extraterritorial obligations. There was a major inconsistency with all the major developed countries, as well as the instruments like the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund and other international organizations. Major States also refused to recognize economic, social and cultural rights, only supporting civil and political rights, such as the United States. That neo-liberal position was that hunger in the world would end once the world market was liberalized and privatized and that there was no reason to intervene in the market to guarantee the right to food. But experience totally contradicted that. It was true that liberalization led to a huge increase in production, but it also led to monopolization of that capital created. They had to put an end to that massacre.

Reporting on his mission to Bolivia, Mr. Ziegler said that he had been impressed with what was happening in the country. Newly elected President Morales had taken control over production of oil and other industries, thereby making available funds for his “Zero Malnutrition Programme”. Mr. Ziegler also thanked Bolivia for enshrining the right to food in its new Constitution. As for his mission to Cuba, the Special Rapporteur congratulated the Cuban Government for having signed and ratified the two covenants on the right to food. The right to food had been a priority for the Government since the revolution. There were problems linked to the need to import food and the blockade by the United States which dated back to 1962, and which had a devastating effect on agriculture and the right to food. Also the explosion in world food prices made life difficult. But the Government was dealing with those problems.

AMBEYI LIGABO, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, presenting his report, said that freedom of opinion and expression was a fundamental human right and a foundation of democracy. The respect of the free circulation of ideas and opinions was a reliable indicator of how much a society respected all other human rights. Unfortunately, violations of this right continued to occur all over the world. The present report focused on the main patterns of violations of this right. To overcome these challenges, concerted and deliberate efforts by the international community would be required. On the safety and protection of journalists, this remained one of the central challenges to the full enjoyment of freedom of expression. All over the world journalists continued to be harassed, threatened and killed. The decision of the United Nations Security Council to hold a debate on the subject of protecting journalists in armed conflicts was welcomed. Governments should take all necessary steps to protect journalists. Censorship, suspension, closing and banning of media outlets were still prevalent.

Mr. Ligabo said that the new media, particularly the Internet, had not escaped these negative trends. The Internet had been severely curtailed in many countries. Consequently he had called for the need to further progress on global Internet governance anchored in a strong human rights vision. Defamation of journalists should be dealt with in the civil law field. Threats posed by hate speeches and the incitement of racial, ethnic or religious hatred remained an issue of major concern. Initiatives that were promoting tolerance, respect for diversity and dialogue among civilizations should be the central strategy. Narrowing the digital divide required more than technological skills; it demanded a new type of education, one that empowered people to be more than spectators, but active players.

In 2007, Mr. Ligabo said that he had visited Azerbaijan and he underlined that he had the impression the country was determined to establish and consolidate its democratic structures. He recommended to the Government to decriminalize defamation offences. Public figures should be tolerant of a greater degree of criticism than ordinary citizens. The Government should guarantee safety and independence of journalists. On his visit in Ukraine, he had observed remarkable progress since the country’s independence. Despite this, additional efforts were still required. The Government should review its media legislation in order to strengthen the media. The Government should also strengthen its protection of minorities. The report of his visit to Honduras would be made available in the next reporting cycle.


Statements by Concerned Countries

JUSTINIAN M. KATEERA (Uganda), speaking as a concerned country, noted that the Special Rapporteur on the right to health had held wide consultations during his mission to Uganda and, in particular, the Government was interested in his consultations with donor governments, civil society, aid agencies, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The report on the mission to Uganda had commended the Swedish Government, through its development arm – the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA), which was one of the largest donor agencies involved in health-sector interventions in Uganda. Taking into consideration the concerns expressed in the report concerning institutional obstacles on the part of the international financial organizations in incorporating human rights obligations when formulating policy and prescribing solutions, Uganda agreed on the need to: grant equitable representation on the Executive Board to developing countries; account publicly for positions taken at these Executive Boards; and have Executive Board members take into account the effect of decisions reached on the realization of economic, social and cultural rights.

In providing assistance in-country, there was a need to ensure that interventions were well coordinated, in order to prevent fragmented and ineffective delivery. Uganda therefore encouraged donors to commit to a budget or sectoral support, rather than project-based support. Uganda also commended the public-private partnerships that were leading research efforts into diseases that disproportionately affected developing countries. Similarly, in realizing the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Uganda was engaged in multilateral efforts aimed at ensuring that intellectual property rights did not unfairly limit access to essential medicine.

ALVARO E. AYALA (Colombia), speaking as a concerned country, with reference to the report by the Special Rapporteur on the right to health, wished to call the Special Rapporteur's attention to the eradication of illicit crops in Colombia, as part of the country’s comprehensive anti-drug policy. Eradication by manual methods had risen from 2,607 hectares in 2004 to 66,000 in 2007. Currently there were some 130 mobile units for more than 4,000 manual eradicators who exposed themselves on a daily basis to the danger of illegal anti-personnel mines laid by illegal armed groups to protect their crops. In 2006, those had cost the lives of 26 manual eradication workers working in the Nature Park of the Sierra de la Macarena. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime issued annual reports on Colombia's activities to eradicate drug production. It was also important to note that the Government's National Anti-Drug Policy was elaborated in conformity with Colombia's Constitution and its national laws that sought to promote and protect human rights, and it also respected international treaties to combat the world drug problem to which Colombia was a party, such as the Convention of 1961 and its protocols. In a 2007 report, the International Narcotic Control Board had recognized the favourable results obtained, and had encouraged the Government to continue its efforts to eradicate cocaine crops and had appreciated the methodology adopted to do so.

With reference to the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Colombia highlighted the great importance it attached to the right to food, and guarantees for that right, especially for the most vulnerable. In particular, Colombia was taking all measures to ensure that the collective lands of its afro-descendant communities were not taken for development by private business.

MAURICIO MONTALVO (Ecuador), speaking as a concerned country, said that, on the right to health, Ecuador had been hoping that the Special Rapporteur’s report on his visit to Ecuador would be made available in this session. His recommendations were very interesting. It was surprising that the Special Rapporteur had never met with the World Health Organization Director-General. Mr. Hunt’s draft report on Ecuador was very much awaited. Ecuador trusted that the draft report would be sent in due time to Ecuador. On the right to food, the Special Rapporteur’s report was very much appreciated, especially after his visits to Bolivia and Cuba.

HANS DAHLGREN (Sweden), speaking as a concerned country, welcomed the interest of the Special Rapporteur on the right to health to Sweden’s policy of global development and to mainstream the right of the poor into its relevant policies. Sweden held the position that there was no legal obligation to provide development assistance or to ensure that the right to health was respected in several countries. Nor did Sweden believe that this served the interests of human rights. This would risk creating an accountability vacuum. Sweden could not assume a legal responsibility for other States assuming their human rights’ obligations and would continue to include information on its relevant international activities when appropriate. Sweden would spare no efforts to mainstream a rights-based approach into its policies.

MAYSA R. URENA (Bolivia), speaking as a concerned country, said that the visit of the Special Rapporteur was made possible by the willingness and openness of Bolivia. In fact, Bolivia had received Special Rapporteurs and the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, all of whom had enjoyed full cooperation of Bolivia. As Mr. Zielger indicated in his report, Bolivia had a long history of abject poverty, despite the abundance of natural resources. In the democratic elections of 2005, Mr. Evo Morales, the nation’s first indigenous President, won with an overwhelming majority. The country had since been committed to making deep seated changes to recover the dignity of all Bolivians. One of the steps towards this goal could be seen in the increase of taxes levied on foreign oil companies to fill Bolivia’s coffers.

Priority had also been attached to achieving zero malnutrition in the country. This fit in well with Bolivia’s desire to eliminate crude neo-liberalism. Mr. Ziegler’s report identified the appropriate legal framework enshrined in the new Constitution, including that of innovative rights such as the right to water. Bolivia had undertaken important efforts to establish nationwide nutrition programmes to reduce malnutrition. The approval of the new Constitution, set for a national referendum in May 2008, would be a landmark moment in Bolivia’s history and the Constitution would address numerous human rights issues, including that of food security.

JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba), speaking as a concerned country, expressed Cuba’s gratitude to the Special Rapporteur on the right to food for his visit to the country. His political courage as well as his independence were praised. Mr. Ziegler had known how to face tendentious accusations made by false non-governmental organizations that had intended to distort his visit to Cuba and to create artificial obstacles to the fulfilment of his mandate. He was an example of integrity, honesty and commitment to the human rights cause. This visit had been the first of a Special Procedure of the Human Rights Council after the correction of the historical injustice represented by the existence of a mandate against Cuba, imposed by the United States. Cuba was ready and willing to support other Special Procedures if the current constructive environment inside the Council was maintained. Cuba had never and would never act under pressure. The recommendations of the Special Rapporteur to the Government of the United States to lift the illegal blockade were particularly appreciated. Despite the blockade, Cuba had achieved important progress. The Special Rapporteur’s performance was proof that there were different ways of doing things. Dialogue and cooperation were essential and imposition and pressure had never worked.

VOLODYMYR VASSYLENKO (Ukraine), speaking as a concerned country, said the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression was one of the priorities of the Ukrainian Government’s human rights policy. After the Orange Revolution in 2004, the President of Ukraine and the Government undertook decisive measures to abolish censorship and provide favorable conditions for the unhindered enjoyment of the right to freedom of opinion and expression in the country. At present the Constitution of Ukraine and national legislation by and large were in line with international standards, but much worked had to be done. Many of the observations, assessments, conclusions and recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur were well grounded and could be used for further promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression in Ukraine. At the same time the report contained some discrepancies and overstatements. The Special Rapporteur, among other things, concluded that the greater freedom achieved in 2005 was reduced by the continuation of physical attacks on journalists and a general atmosphere of intimidation, while recognizing a decrease in the past years of crimes against journalists and media professionals. The Special Rapporteur repeatedly referred to the alleged “wave of racist violence” in Ukraine and well as to the existence of “many extremist groups”, particularly neo-Nazi organizations. In other words, he arbitrarily labeled Ukraine as a racist country, but this was untrue. The Ukrainian society had always been and was a truly multicultural society with a solid tradition of ethnic and religious tolerance. Ukraine extended an invitation to the Special Rapporteur to cooperate with relevant Ukrainian agencies in order to make his report more balanced and adequate.

ELCHIN AMIRBAYOV (Azerbaijan), speaking as a concerned country, said that given the importance of a free and independent mass media for a functioning democracy, the Government of Azerbaijan had sought to achieve this since independence was restored in 1991. No control was exercised by the Azerbaijani Government over the mass media. Most of the major opposition parties published their own newspapers and quite a few independent electronic mass media functioned freely in the country. However, the occasional lack of professionalism of journalists was of concern, and in some cases it proved difficult to differentiate between criticism and insult. Concerning the mentioned attacks against journalists, it was obvious that they were not arrested for their professional activities but solely for violating the provisions of national law. At the same time, several isolated cases should not be used to reflect the overall situation with mass media in the country. Finally, it was stated that the debate on the decriminalization of defamation was underway in the Azerbaijani society.

Interactive Dialogue

MESHAAL ALI AL ATTIYAH (Qatar), speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, said that the Arab Group was convinced of the close relationship between the right to health and the achievement of sustainable development. All Arab national legislation provided for ensuring this right without discrimination, and most had acceded to international conventions which guaranteed the right to health. Article 39 of the Arab Charter on Human Rights also provided for ensuring the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. The realization of this right could be achieved solely through clarity of a strategic vision.

IMAD ZUHAIRI (Palestine), speaking on behalf of the League of Arab States, emphasized the need to preserve the right to freedom of expression and opinion as long as one did not insult other beliefs in expression of views. The League of Arab States did not understand why the Special Rapporteur did not provide a framework for regulating the media as they did not regulate themselves. To have some sort of safety mechanisms to preserve the rights of others, it was important not to slander the religious beliefs of others or undermine their beliefs. The League of Arab States asked the Special Rapporteur on the right to food to explain why children were dying with such frequency as well as for his views on why certain countries did not view the right to food as a human right.

One could not speak of the right to food without raising the issue of the Palestinian people. The League of Arab States expressed its concern over this situation, as well as the crisis in Sub-Saharan Africa. The international community must help those suffering from the food crisis so they would have a dignified life.

RAJIV KUMAR CHANDER (India) said that India had taken note of Paul Hunt’s preliminary report and looked forward to his full report and the recommendations found therein. Many of the concerns raised by him, particularly with regards to maternal healthcare, were already being addressed in the framework of the National Rural Health Mission. Jean Ziegler was also commended for his work as Special Rapporteur on the right to food, especially in sensitizing the world about the huge efforts that were still required to achieve the goal of food security for all. A positive note had also been taken with regards to the visit of the Special Rapporteur’s visit to Cuba as well as Cuba’s commitment to cooperate with the international human rights machinery.

Concerning the report by the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, India recognized that those particular rights were not absolute ones and acknowledged that these rights came with certain responsibilities. However, the hurting of sentiments of any community under the guise of freedom of expression was unacceptable. Furthermore, in agreement with the Special Rapporteur, any limitation on the right to freedom of expression could not be arbitrary, should be clearly and narrowly defined, and should be applied by an independent judiciary.

MARGHOOB SALEEM BUTT (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said that on the right to health, the OIC believed that a sustainable approach to achieve the highest possible standards should include national and international dimensions. What were the views of the Special Rapporteur on the lack of research and development on neglected diseases? On the right to food, it was saddening that over 854 million people were suffering from hunger in today’s world. This showed that the economic miracle formulas prescribed by some international institutions needed adjustments. The realizations of the right to food needed transparency, accountability and coherence of any policy before its implementation. Thus the role of institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank needed to be redefined. On the freedom of expression, the OIC did not share the views of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression. His analysis did not take into account the increasing instrumentalization of the freedom of expression by extreme right groups.

IDRISS JAZAIRY (Algeria), with regard to the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, emphasized, as had been stated by the Special Rapporteur himself, that the international community could eradicate hunger but lacked the will to do so. Given current trends, it appeared that even the modest goals of the Millennium Development Goals were not going to be realized. The Council should be concerned with the rise in food prices as this affected food aid. The World Food Programme saw its buying power reduced by 40 per cent in the last year. The Council should call for food aid commitments in kind rather than in cash. As the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food was coming to an end, Algeria wished to express its gratitude to the Special Rapporteur for his work.

MONA EL BAHTIMY (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said that food security was an imperative condition for the enjoyment of all fundamental human rights. The African Group was deeply alarmed by the six million children under the age of five who died each year due to malnutrition and under-nourishment. It was also alarmed by the risk of food shortage as well as the scaling back of the World Food Programme’s work in this area. The African Group would appreciate an elaboration from Mr. Ziegler on how to overcome the lack of government responsibility and how to effectively implement reforms with regards to the right to food. Also, in a final question from the African Group, what was the potential role of trans-national corporations on improving the situation of international food security?

AMR ROSHDY HASSAN (Egypt), speaking in his national capacity, said Egypt expressed its concern with Mr. Hunt’s view of health. However, Egypt had always admired the integrity of Mr. Hunt in his assessment of the health situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It was clear that Israel was blocking medical supplies to Palestinians. Congratulations were also extended to Mr. Ziegler, stating that the United Nations would be a much better place with more people like him. A request was also made with regards to Mr. Ligabo’s mandate, stating that clearer references needed to be made to ensure that freedom of opinion was not used to defame people’s religions.

SILVANO TOMASI (Holy See) said that the Holy See was pleased to note that the right to health was a fundamental building block of sustainable development, as stated in the Special Rapporteur’s report. Pope Benedict XVI had recently affirmed that adequate health and the elimination of pandemics were needed to build a more secure future. The definition of health extended beyond medical interventions and included a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being. In this regard, the role that could be accorded to religious organizations was underlined. Such organizations often assumed significant responsibility for the burden of health care delivery. Too often these service providers had no voice during the formulation of health care plans on national and local levels. The right to life of the most vulnerable people should never be denied.

H.A.S. NATAFAYA (Indonesia) said, with regard to the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Indonesia deplored that in spite of efforts to implement the first Millennium Development Goal, hunger was in fact rising rather than diminishing, as the figures in the Special Rapporteur’s report attested. Among the conclusion in the said report was the noted disregard for the principle of the right to food as a precondition of the right to life, to a decent standard of living, and to health in its relation to proper nutrition. By the same token, the direct effects of malnutrition on development, and hence on other human rights, were also consistently overlooked. Indonesia strongly concurred with the Special Rapporteur on the need for a new legal instrument to protect those who were fleeing from hunger and for a mechanism which complied with the principle of non-refoulement. With regard to the report on the freedom of expression, the Special Rapporteur’s approach rightly insisted on the primacy of the right to freedom of opinion and expression as an inalienable human right. Indonesia believed that further debate should take place to seek some means of accommodating the right to freedom of opinion and expression and other inalienable rights which bordered with it.

RODOLFO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said that, in addition to its previous statement as a concerned country, and as a member of the Non-Aligned Movement, it was working on a document called “Diseases that Need to be Urgently Addressed”. Cuba was also working on improving the issue of pharmaceutical companies and the availability of medicines in developing countries. Such services were of great importance to Africa and efforts to provide medicine and medical practitioners in that continent had to be supported.

Cuba also agreed with every recommendation made by Mr. Ziegler and congratulated Bolivia for embarking on a positive path, in line with the needs and full self-determination of that country’s citizens, including its indigenous people. Concerning Mr. Ligabo’s report, two concerns were raised. The first was the need to tackle the issue of vulnerability of the Internet, which at present remained under the control of one country. The United States had the right to ban access to certain websites and had done so, using the notorious Helms-Burton Law, to ban several websites on Cuba. Finally, with regards to racial discrimination and freedom of opinion, the Cuban delegation believed that one’s views should only be expressed in so far as they did not impede on other people’s right to religious freedom.

SERGIO ABREU E LIMA FLORENCIO (Brazil), said that, on the right to food, Brazil was deeply concerned with the Special Rapporteur’s approach on biofuels. The view of the Special Rapporteur that converting food into fuel was a recipe for disaster was rejected. With this ill-conceived idea the Special Rapporteur was rejecting the prospect that biofuels were opening in developing countries. Brazil was opposed to the establishment of a five-year moratorium to develop biofuels. Brazil was convinced that biofuels would bring positive changes in developing countries. The Special Rapporteur was nevertheless thanked for his recognition of the positive aspects of the biofuel production in Brazil. This recognition should not be limited to Brazil but to all developing countries. This should be incorporated in the coming reports. On the right to health, the professionalism of the Special Rapporteur was welcomed.

SHEN YONGXIANG (China), taking note of the report by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, said over many years the Special Rapporteur had been making many efforts to ensure the realization of this right and his final report provided comprehensive information on States’ obligations and measures to promote the realization this right. The report also contained constructive recommendations paving the way for future work in this regard. Food was the most fundamental right and constituted an indispensable component to the right to development. It was noted that people living in poverty in rural areas in China had been reduced from 250 million in 1978 to 21 million today and that poverty had been reduced from 30.7 per cent in 1978 to 2.3 per cent today. China hoped that the Council would continue to attach importance to the right to food as had Mr. Ziegler.

ALEJANDRO ARTUCIO RODRIGUEZ (Uruguay) congratulated the three Special Procedures for their comprehensive reports but would focus only on Mr. Ziegler’s report on the right to food. Quoting Mr. Ziegler, “hunger and hungry people were not inevitable2 (paragraph 77). As a corollary to the right to food, governments needed to ensure that this right be enjoyed and guaranteed. As a general rule, hunger affected first the poorest and most vulnerable parts of society, namely children, women and those with disabilities. Uruguay supported any and all efforts at legislating economic, social and cultural rights. Furthermore, India and South Africa were noted as positive examples as listed in Mr. Ziegler’s report. In conclusion, Uruguay associated itself with the report and sought to ensure the same kind of rights within its own Constitution as was recommended by Mr. Ziegler’s report.

LEBAMANG BERNARD MOQHALI (Lesotho) said that, on the right to food, the tireless efforts of the Special Rapporteur during his tenure were highly applauded. The right to food was a basic human right. How could the nations of the world happily celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights while millions of children were dying from hunger around the world? It was hoped that the Special Rapporteur’s successor would follow in the footsteps of Professor Ziegler.

For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC08020E