HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE WITH EXPERTS ON TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS, FOREIGN DEBT AND EDUCATION

The Human Rights Council at a midday meeting today held an interactive dialogue with the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, the Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of human rights, and the Special Rapporteur on the right to education.

John Ruggie, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said most States had adopted measures and established institutions relevant to business and human rights, in such areas as labour standards, workplace non-discrimination, health and safety, and consumer protection. However, States had been slower to address the more systemic challenge of fostering rights-respecting corporate cultures and practices. Reality fell far short of constituting a comprehensive and inclusive system of remedy - all types of mechanisms remained underdeveloped, and too many judicial systems were inaccessible to those who needed them most. The report identified specific obstacles and gaps in this regard. The report also took up the sensitive issue of extraterritorial jurisdiction, identifying ways to distinguish what was truly problematic from measures that were entirely permissible under international law and which would be in the best interest of all concerned.

Cephas Lumina, the Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of human rights, said the report before the Council was intended mainly to draw attention to the negative impacts of ‘vulture funds’ on international debt relief efforts and the realization of human rights. Reduced debt burdens and increased fiscal space had contributed to the creation of the conditions necessary for the realization of human rights in some countries. Nevertheless, the voluntary character of these debt relief schemes had created opportunities for unscrupulous commercial creditors to purchase defaulted debts at substantial discounts and to seek repayment of the full value of the debt through litigation and seizure of sovereign assets. By forcing indebted poor countries to divert financial resources saved from debt cancellation, vulture funds had diminished the impact of the potential gains from debt relief and undermined the objectives of internationally agreed debt relief measures.

Vernor Muñoz Villalobos, the Special Rapporteur on the right to education, said that since his last report he had conducted official visits to Mongolia, Mexico and Paraguay. This year’s thematic report focused on the right to education for particularly marginalized groups such as migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers. Due to the increased migration flows observed since the 1970s, there was a greater presence of migrants and refugees in educational systems, which had led to tensions between migrants and national students that sometimes resulted in episodes of xenophobic violence. Those tensions were a consequence of linguistic, religious or cultural differences, or due to the shortage of resources, and made migrant students more vulnerable to marginalization. Another obstacle to access to education for migrants and refugees was shortage of teachers, overcrowding in classrooms and stereotyping and cultural discrimination. It was of particular importance to increase the efforts to identify disabled migrants or refugees and ensure their access to the same educational opportunities that nationals enjoyed.

Norway and Ecuador spoke as concerned countries on the issue of the effects of foreign debt, while Paraguay, Mongolia, and Mexico spoke as concerned countries on the issue of the right to education.

During the interactive dialogue, concerning human rights and transnational corporations, speakers said legislative safeguards and measures should be implemented by governments to ensure that transnational corporations respected the rights of communities and individuals and the environments in which they lived and worked. States had a duty to encourage greater corporate social responsibility in their policies and practices and there was an obvious need to increase access to judicial mechanisms and to educate businesses on the importance of human rights. There was a need for a coherent and systemic response from States and stakeholders to cover the governance gaps caused by globalization. Identifying practical measures for how States and companies could become more effective and responsive in identifying and remedying human rights challenges was a positive element of the Special Representative’s report. The Representative was asked to expand on the particular implications for State-owned enterprises.

With regard to the effects of foreign debt on the enjoyment of human rights, speakers thanked the Independent Expert for drawing attention to so-called “vulture funds” used by private entities in relation to debt relief. Activities related to those funds highlighted the problems and the unfairness of the current financial system, and combat against those funds must be part and parcel of the reform of the international financial system. It was noted that the situation was catastrophic for most African nations who were caught in an inescapable spiral of debt due to unscrupulous creditors and unfair lending conditions. Debts should either be fully cancelled or significantly reduced as excessive repayments made it near impossible for African nations to achieve social and economic development. It was suggested that the Independent Expert should further explore other realms and initiatives aimed at debt relief and whether they contributed or hampered the ability of States to fulfil their obligations for the promotion and protection of human rights.

Concerning the right to education, speakers said education helped migrants achieve self-realization and pull themselves out of marginalization and social exclusion. Additionally, it helped receiving societies become more inclusive and cohesive. Guaranteeing the right to education was a matter of political will; unfortunately the violations of this right were all too frequent. The right to education should not only be seen as a legal matter but also as a citizen issue that required deliberation, and it was suggested that the Special Rapporteur outline possible steps to combat the scourge of "structural discrimination" in the field of education against second-generation immigrants, and say which particular areas of groups, in addition to those already covered in his reports, he believed merited further and increased attention by the Council in connection with the enjoyment of the right to education.

Speaking during the interactive dialogue were Indonesia, Italy, Australia, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, European Union, United States, Russian Federation, Norway, India, Denmark, Portugal, United Kingdom, Republic of Korea, Sweden, Cuba, Switzerland, Nepal, Egypt, Nigeria on behalf of the African Group, Guatemala, Belgium, China, France, Algeria, African Union and Venezuela.

The next meeting of the Council will be at 3 p.m. this afternoon, when it will convene an urgent debate on the raid of the humanitarian aid flotilla by Israeli Defence Forces. On Wednesday, 2 June at 9 a.m., the Council will resume its interactive dialogue with the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, the Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of human rights, and the Special Rapporteur on the right to education.


Documentation

The Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Enterprises, John Ruggie (A/HRC/14/27) illustrates the Special Representative’s working methods in operationalizing and promoting the “protect, respect and remedy” framework. This policy framework rests on three pillars: the State duty to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including business, through appropriate policies, regulation, and adjudication; the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, which means to act with due diligence to avoid infringing on the rights of others; and greater access to victims to effective remedy, judicial and non-judicial.

The Report of the Independent Expert on the Effects of Foreign Debt and other Related International Financial Obligations of States on the Full Enjoyment of All Human Rights Cephas Lumina (A/HRC/14/21) is intended to draw global attention to the adverse impacts of vulture fund activities on debt relief and on the capacity of poor countries to fulfill their human rights obligations and attain their development goals. It also includes a call for definitive international and national action to combat vulture fund activity.

Missions to Norway (28 – 30 April 2009) and Ecuador (2-8 May 2009) (A/HRC/14/21/Add.1) examines the unique roles of the two countries in the debate concerning illegitimate debt and considers the implications of recent decisions by Norway and Ecuador related to public debt for the realization of human rights. The visits were linked in order that the issues could be considered from both the creditor and debtor perspective. The present report is based on these visits.

The Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education, Vernor Muñoz (A/HRC/14/25) focuses on the right to education of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. The report looks at those who have crossed national borders, who generally are at risk of marginalization and specifically to discrimination in the provision of education. The report addresses six core issues: the legal and normative framework; social and cultural issues; language and curriculum; teachers; accreditation; and learning for life.

Corrigendum 1 (A/HRC/14/25/Corr.1) contains footnotes for the report.

Communications to and from Governments (A/HRC/14/25/Add.1) is a summary of communications sent and replies received from governments and other actors in the preparation of this report.

Mission to Paraguay (14-22 April 2009) (A/HRC/14/25/Add.2) describes the Special Rapporteur’s mission to Paraguay where he examined the status of the right to education at all levels: preschool, primary, secondary and tertiary education. The Special Rapporteur found a number of challenges facing Paraguay’s education system including a high repetition rate in basic education, a low completion rate in secondary education and the neglect into which rural dwellers and indigenous communities had fallen, in nearly all aspects of development.

Mission to Mongolia (A/HRC/14/25/Add.3) analyses the principal characteristics of the Mongolian educational system, such as the organization of studies, coverage, infrastructure and financing of education, special programmes and adult education, highlights some of the good practices the Special Rapporteur was able to observe during his visit, such as the high enrolment rates and how Mongol society values education; and other examples such as the mobile kindergartens and school snacks, as well as some programs of education for minorities and incentives for distance education that show creativity and adaptation to the vastness of the land and the climatic conditions encountered.

Mission to Mexico (A/HRC/14/25/Add.4) was unavailable as of 1 June 2010.


Presentations by the Experts on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations, Effects of Foreign Debt on Human Rights and Right to Education

JOHN RUGGIE, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises, said the mandate was established in 2005, and since then had won unprecedented backing across the battle lines from both business and pressure groups. It had got there by recognizing that business and human rights challenges reflected a broader institutional misalignment between the scope and impact of economic forces and actors, and the capacity of societies to manage their adverse consequences, and thus required comprehensive responses; by conducting voluminous research producing a better understanding of the challenges as well as gaps in existing coverage, public and private; and by convening more than 30 international consultations with stakeholders and experts in all regions to identify practical actions forward. Most States had adopted measures and established institutions relevant to business and human rights, in such areas as labour standards, workplace non-discrimination, health and safety, and consumer protection. However, States had been slower to address the more systemic challenge of fostering rights-respecting corporate cultures and practices.

Reality fell far short of constituting a comprehensive and inclusive system of remedy - all types of mechanisms remained underdeveloped, and too many judicial systems were inaccessible to those who needed them most. The report identified specific obstacles and gaps in this regard. It also addressed two cross-cutting issues - one was the role of business in conflict-affected areas, where the worst corporate-related human rights abuses occurred. No one could claim that the existing human rights regime was able to function in such contexts. The report also took up the sensitive issue of extraterritorial jurisdiction, identifying ways to distinguish what was truly problematic from measures that were entirely permissible under international law and which would be in the best interest of all concerned. The mandate would end in June 2011, and at that time, Mr. Ruggie said he would present the views, recommendations and practical guidance that the Council had requested in Resolution 8/5. He foresaw this as taking two forms: one was a set of guiding principles under each pillar of the United Nations Framework for Business and Human Rights: general enough to be universally applicable, thus recognizing the diversity of country and business contexts, but specific enough to have practical utility. The other was laying out the pros and cons of various ways the Council might consider following up on this mandate. The work of the Council in this field had to continue, as the international community was still in the early stages of adapting the human rights regime to provide more effective protection to individuals and communities against corporate-related human rights harm.

CEPHAS LUMINAS, the Independent Expert on the Effects of Foreign Debt and Other Related International Financial Obligations of States on the Full Enjoyment of Human Rights, said the report before the Council was intended mainly to draw attention to the negative impacts of ‘vulture funds’ on international debt relief efforts and the realization of human rights. Reduced debt burdens and increased fiscal space had contributed to the creation of the conditions necessary for the realization of human rights in some countries. Nevertheless, the voluntary character of these debt relief schemes had created opportunities for unscrupulous commercial creditors to purchase defaulted debts at substantial discounts and to seek repayment of the full value of the debt through litigation and seizure of sovereign assets. By forcing indebted poor countries to divert financial resources saved from debt cancellation, vulture funds had diminished the impact of the potential gains from debt relief and undermined the objectives of internationally agreed debt relief measures. The settlement of excessive vulture fund claims by heavily indebted poor countries, whose debt levels have been deemed unpayable by the international community, had negatively impacted on these countries’ capacity to fulfill their human rights obligations. It was for that reason that the report called for more concrete, legally enforceable measures to curb the unethical activities of vulture funds and safeguard the gains from international debt relief efforts.

Turning to his country visits, Mr. Lumina said that the primary aim of these had been to examine the concerned countries’ roles in the debate on illegitimate debt and to consider the implications of the two countries’ decisions for the realizations of human rights. The visits had been linked to allow for consideration of the issues from the creditor and debtor perspective. As for the mission to Norway, the Independent Expert said Norway had a commendable international development policy and debt relief strategy and was demonstrably committed to find a durable solution to the debt problem of developing countries. Mr. Lumina called upon other creditor countries to emulate Norway’s progressive position. In Ecuador, the Independent Expert was impressed with the Government’s dedication to fulfilling its human rights obligations, particularly those relating to economic, social and cultural rights, and ensuring accountability in the use of public resources. The mandate holder then went on to say that he would be conducting a series of regional consultations on the Draft General Guidelines on foreign debt and human rights, calling upon all Member States to support these consultations through participating in the consultation for their region and supporting the participation of civil society.

VERNOR MUNOZ VILLALOBOS, the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education, said this would be the last time he addressed the Council as the Special Rapporteur on the right to education. The intensive agenda that he had implemented over the past six years was made possible thanks to the interest of governments, universities, international and non-governmental organizations, multilateral and United Nations agencies, teachers’ unions, students groups and national human rights institutions. The work plan elaborated in 2004 had focused on individuals and populations that historically had been excluded from educational opportunities. Thematic studies had been dedicated to obstacles facing those populations with the view of making recommendations to States and thus enabling them to advance the enjoyment of the right to education.

Since the presentation of his last report, Mr. Munoz said he had conducted official visits to Mongolia, Mexico and Paraguay. This year’s thematic report focused on the right to education for particularly marginalized groups such as migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers. Due to the increased migration flows observed since the 1970s, there was a greater presence of migrants and refugees in educational systems, which had led to tensions between migrants and national students that sometimes resulted in episodes of xenophobic violence. Those tensions were a consequence of linguistic, religious or cultural differences, or due to the shortage of resources, and made migrant students more vulnerable to marginalization. Another obstacle to access to education for migrants and refugees was shortage of teachers, overcrowding in classrooms and stereotyping and cultural discrimination. Political elements that most impacted on States’ implementing their education responsibilities were lack of resources. States had been using the global economic and financial crises as an excuse to fail to live up to their education responsibilities. It was of a particular importance to increase the efforts to identify disabled migrants or refugees and ensure their access to the same educational opportunities that nationals enjoyed. Disability in itself was a condition that undermined social opportunities and in the case of migrant or refugee population, had a particularly grave impact on the rights of people with different abilities and made them doubly or triply discriminated against.

Turning to his country visits, Mr. Munoz said that the purpose of the visit to Paraguay was to study the educational system, including the analysis of its principal characteristics. A number of challenges facing the educational system included the high rate of repeating years in lower education, the low rate of accessing middle education, and the constant drop out in rural and indigenous communities. Mr. Munoz’s recommendation was to allocate an increasing budget to education, to reach at least 6 per cent of the national gross product. He also considered as urgent the need to stimulate a national debate to cast education as a political issue. In Mongolia, the purpose of his visit was to see how Mongolia implemented the human right to education and the measures it adopted. Mr. Munoz noted the high rate of school attendance despite vast spaces and the high number of nomads. Experiments conducted by the Government had been very innovative, such as roving kindergartens and an excellent school feeding programme. Mongolia was still experiencing drop outs and the Government was taking measures to increase water and sanitation coverage. The care of students with disabilities remained an important challenge. During the visit to Mexico, Mr. Munoz examined the initiatives of the Government and analyzed challenges such as quality of education, education of indigenous people and inclusive education. While Mexico saw an increase in school enrolment, two major challenges were overcoming the exclusion created by the education system itself and increasing the quality of education for all population groups.


Statements by Concerned Countries

BEATE STIRO (Norway), speaking as a concerned country, said debt service could be an obstacle to development and poverty reduction. The international instruments: the Highly Indebted Poor Countries Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative had been a success. However, in many countries, traditional debt relief was not enough. Norway found the focus on a human rights-based approach to foreign debt both interesting and challenging. The discussion on external debt was about more than sustainability and charity. The discussion on external debt should not only focus on how much debt a poor country could have - it should also include how much debt a poor country should have based on how the loans were given. The discussion on external debt was also about creditor responsibility and fairness.

MAURICIO MONTALVO (Ecuador), speaking as a concerned country, thanked the Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt on human rights for his important report on his visit to Ecuador. Under Ecuador’s new Constitution, which was enforced in 2008, the Government had redefined its policies for assigning resources of the general state budget, always ensuring the well-being of the poorest sectors of society. The Government of Ecuador fully endorsed Mr. Lumina’s analysis regarding Ecuador’s foreign debt, re-negotiations of debt, and the cancellation of Ecuador’s debt with Norway, among other topics, but asked how the mandate holder saw the difference between the illegitimacy and the legitimacy of the debt, particularly regarding Ecuador’s credit operations between 1970 and 2007. To conclude, the delegation assured that Ecuador would welcome further cooperation on these topics of common interests.

FEDERICO A. GONZALEZ (Paraguay), speaking as a concerned country, said that significant progress had been made in their education department but more work was still to be done. Paraguay reiterated that bilingualism was a fundamental part of the structure of their country. In fact, Paraguay was the only South American country to have two official languages, which was enshrined in the nation’s 1992 Constitution. In the view of the Government, indigenous languages were an important part of the country’s heritage and there was an urgent need to promote linguistic diversity. There were also Government programmes to provide coordination and advice on gender issues. In addition, programmes were being implemented for street children and child workers, who were being given special support in an attempt to get children off the streets and back into school. The national education plan for human rights had also made important headway in recent years and there was a general aim to promote and educate the importance of universal human rights. Paraguay reaffirmed its commitment to working with the Special Rapporteur on the right to education.

LUVSANTSEREN ORGIL (Mongolia), speaking as a concerned country concerning the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to education, said the Government of Mongolia attached great importance to ensuring the right to education for all, and was committed to fulfilling its obligations under international treaties. Mongolia was proud of the targets it had achieved with regard to education, but was fully aware of the difficulties and challenges it faced with regard to education, and took note of the recommendations contained in the report, in particular with regard to children with disabilities. Mongolia was a country rich in mineral resources, and last October had begun to exploit and implement major development programmes. The proceeds from the exploitation of these resources would be invested in the people, the development of human capital, the improvement of education, and acquiring new skills.

ARTURO HERNANDEZ BASAVE (Mexico), speaking as a concerned country, said many of the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on the right to education had already been implemented by the Mexican Government. The Government’s commitment to promoting human rights was reflected in changes in the legal framework and in reforms to place the right to education at a constitutional level. In the delegation’s view, the right to education was implemented when children had access to quality education, thus Mexico agreed with Mr. Munoz that the quality of education should be seen as an essential component of the right to education. The right to education should not only be seen as a legal matter but also as a citizen issue that required deliberation. The recommendations of the Special Rapporteur would be very useful to improve Mexico’s legal framework, the delegation said, asserting that Mexico was fully committed to continue working with the holder of that mandate.


Interactive Dialogue

DIAN TRIANSYAH DJANI (Indonesia) said that against the backdrop of the appalling environmental and social consequences of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, there was a need for more systematic and collaborative global efforts to raise awareness of human rights among corporate actors. In this regard, Indonesia appreciated the efforts of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations to organize brainstorming workshops and seminars with relevant stakeholders. Legislative safeguards and measures should be implemented by Governments in order to ensure that transnational corporations respected the rights of communities and individuals and the environments in which they live and work. With regards to the report on education, Indonesia believed that the right to development and the right to education should be approached as mutually reinforcing. However, the report also pointed out the inequality of treatment affecting migrants where education was concerned. This was mainly due to the fact that education was not always, or not sufficiently, perceived as a basic human right.

ROBERTO VELLANO (Italy) said with regard to the Special Rapporteur on education, Italy appreciated the work that had been done in the mandate on this fundamental issue. The last thematic report focused on the right to education of migrants, asylum-seekers and refugees, but today Italy wished to ask questions on a different matter, although it did not disregard the importance of this issue. In 2007 the Council launched the process of coming up with a United Nations Declaration on Education and Human Rights, which was currently in an advanced situation. One of the subjects to be discussed was the relationship between the right to education and human rights training in education. Was there a direct link between the right to education and basic educational values that could be derived from reading article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Italy asked?

CALLISTA HARRIS (Australia) said, with regard to the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations, that Australia noted with interest the five priority areas through which States should strive to achieve greater policy coherence. It also noted the recommendation that States identify human rights-related risks as a factor in determining “materiality” under financial reporting requirements. Could the Rapporteur, or States, comment on corporate reactions to these requirements, where they had been implemented. As for the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to education of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, Australia was particularly interested in the comments on educational strategies that strengthened the capabilities of marginalized communities. Could the Special Rapporteur share his views on the role of education in creating opportunities for migrants and their families, the delegation asked.

SAEED SARWAR (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, said that the Organization of the Islamic Conference would have liked to have had an interactive dialogue with all three Special Procedures. However, due to the very late posting of the report on the effects of foreign debt, they were unable to reflect and comment on that particular report. With respect to transnational corporations, States had duties to encourage greater corporate social responsibility in their policies and practices. In this regard, companies should understand that the responsibility to respect human rights was not a one time transactional activity but was dynamic and ongoing. On the issue of the right of education for migrants, the Organization of the Islamic Conference shared the concern of the Special Rapporteur that a disproportionate burden was carried by countries that were least able to afford it. Moreover, the Organization of the Islamic Conference mentioned that migrant groups were generally at risk of marginalization as well as discrimination in the provision of educational facilities. The Special Rapporteur was commended for his recommendation that curricula be designed by holding consultations with parents/guardians of migrant groups.

LEONOR VIEIRA SOUSA (European Union) said the European Union remained supportive of the Special Representative on transnational corporations’ "protect, respect and remedy" framework, and welcomed the significant range of activities that he had initiated in response to the Council's renewed mandate of June 2008. The European Union attached great importance to the protection and promotion of human rights from corporate-related human rights abuse. The principle at the heart of human rights law, that States owed human rights obligations to individuals in their territory, was fundamental to the European Union, and at the European level significant work was underway to marry the European Union's role as an economic actor to its efforts to promote human rights. The European Union welcomed the Representative's intention to produce, in the 2011 report, a set of guiding principles for the operationalisation of his framework, and his suggestion that the Council should then consider the establishment of an advisory and capacity-building function within the United Nations system. Following the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to education, the European Union was aware of the need to improve the education and training of migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers in its Member States, and had taken steps in this direction.

ANNA MORAWIEC MANSFIELD (United States) said the United States agreed with the Special Rapporteur on the right to education that education for migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers was an important topic. The United States had a strong record of providing all children with a quality education, including asylum seekers, refugees, and migrants. However, it believed that information sharing and capacity-building of educational institutions would better serve the shared goal of educational quality than a set of regional and international qualifications systems with automatic recognition of achievements, as described in the report. The United States also appreciated the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations. The United States had been following the Special Representative’s work closely and would remain committed to participating in initiatives that proactively addressed business and human rights issues.

MARINA KORUNOVA (Russian Federation) said that Russia believed that the issue of human rights and transnational corporations was an important one and should continue to be pursued. The Russian Federation was impressed with the work of Special Representative of the Secretary-General, John Ruggie, who took into account differing perspectives on this issue. There was an obvious need to increase access to judicial mechanisms and to educate businesses on the importance of human rights. The Russian Federation looked forward to Mr. Ruggie’s next report, which would be released in June 2011. Mr. Ruggie had visited Russia. Russia reiterated its commitment to protecting, respecting and ensuring justice. There was an obligation of the private sector to respect human rights. While conditions of the economic crisis had made things difficult, efforts were being made by Russian business owners to improve their human rights records. Economic, social and environmental factors were playing an increasingly important role and Russian businesses were beginning to understand the importance of corporate responsibility.

BEATE STIRO (Norway) said with regard to the report of the Special Representative on transnational corporations, this was an important step towards making the Framework "protect, respect, and remedy" operational. There was a need for a coherent and systemic response from States and stakeholders to cover the governance gaps caused by globalization. Identifying practical measures for how States and companies could become more effective and responsive in identifying and remedying human rights challenges was a positive element of the report. Chapter three of the report covered the State's duty to protect, and identified five priority areas through which States should strive to achieve greater policy coherence and effectiveness. The Representative should expand on particular implications for State-owned enterprises.

GOPINATHAN ACHAMKULANGARE (India) said India, along with Argentina, Nigeria, Norway and the Russian Federation, had supported the establishment of the mandate of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations, as well as its extension in 2008. At a time when there was a rising chorus of demand for greater corporate accountability and regulation of business, and in the wake of the global financial crisis, it was pertinent that the Special Representative focused on practical, viable and result-oriented yardsticks, the delegation said. India was also encouraged by the efforts of the Special Representative to tackle the highly politicized issue of extraterritorial jurisdiction as well as his view that conducting human rights due diligence should not automatically and fully absolve a company from liabilities. In India, voluntary guidelines for Corporate Social Responsibility had recently been developed to foster a rights-respecting culture in the corporate sector.

ARNOLD DE FINE SKIBSTED (Denmark) said that Denmark fully shared the view of Mr. Ruggie that the governance gaps were unsustainable because they provided an environment for wrong-doing by companies without adequate sanctioning. Denmark also agreed that changes in policies and regulation must be coherent in order to have any effect. Some questions were posed to the Special Representative, including conflict-affected areas, where the risk of business-related human rights violations was prevalent. Denmark also asked the Special Representative to elaborate further on situations where national law conflicted with international standards and where legal compliance may undermine the corporate responsibility to respect human rights.

FRANCISCO XAVIER ESTEVES (Portugal) said this year the Special Rapporteur on the right to education chose to draw the attention of the Council, and of the international community, to a group traditionally marginalised and vulnerable to discrimination in education: that of migrants, refugees, and asylum-seekers. Portugal was the main sponsor of the resolution on the right to education regularly submitted to the Council, and was strongly committed to ensure the full enjoyment of the right to education by all persons within its jurisdiction. Portuguese legislation explicitly recognized the right to education of irregular and undocumented migrant and refugee children, and had created a special registry for children in irregular situations. The Special Rapporteur should suggest possible steps to combat the scourge of "structural discrimination" in the field of education against second-generation immigrants, and say which particular areas of groups, in addition to those already covered in his reports, did he believe merited further and increased attention by the Council in connection with the enjoyment of the right to education.

JOSEPH MCCLINTOCK (United Kingdom) said, with regard to the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations, the United Kingdom was a strong supporter of that mandate, reiterating its thanks for the broad range of consultations the mandate holder had initiated. The United Kingdom also appreciated the attention given by the Special Representative to conflict areas, where the most corporate-related human rights abuses occurred. The United Kingdom looked forward to the forthcoming guiding principles and welcomed Mr. Ruggie’s exploration of questions around extraterritorial jurisdictions and looked forward to continue working jointly on this. As for the report of the Independent Expert on foreign debt, the United Kingdom thanked him for his mention of the United Kingdom’s recent debt relief act.

KIM DONG-JO (Republic of Korea) said that the Republic of Korea was working to establish an equitable and shared society and reiterated the importance of guaranteeing the right to education for vulnerable persons such as migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. Education helped migrants achieve self-realization and could help them pull themselves out of marginalization and social exclusion. Additionally, it helped receiving societies become more inclusive and cohesive. With this approach in mind, Korean schools and local education offices provided migrant children with support that was customized to meet their different needs so that they could successfully adapt to school life in the country. Finally, the Republic of Korea asked if Mr. Munoz could share his view on how to effectively ensure that migrants were given the opportunities to present their issues and concerns with regard to teaching practices and curricular content.

HANS DAHLGREN (Sweden) said the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations showed that an impressive amount of work had been carried out towards operationalisation of the framework. The delegation highlighted that Sweden, during its Presidency of the European Union in the autumn of 2009, had hosted a conference on corporate social responsibility. Sweden welcomed that the Special Representative had provided details of a possible grievance mechanism that might provide access to remedy for those whose rights were violated by the corporate sphere. On that point, what were the most efficient ways to address victims’ grievances, the delegation asked Mr. Ruggie, and what was needed to make progress in that area?

JUAN ANTONIO QUINTARILLA ROMAN (Cuba) thanked the mandate holders for their reports and congratulated Mr. Lumina for drawing the attention to the so-called “vulture funds” used by private entities in relation to debt relief. Activities related to those funds highlighted the problems and the unfairness of the current financial system. Combat against those funds must be part and parcel of the reform of the international financial system. Cuba said it would be introducing a draft resolution on the impact of debt on human rights, particularly on economic, social and cultural rights. Cuba acknowledged the great work done by the Special Rapporteur on the right to education and agreed that migrants and refugees were exposed to greater discrimination in the sector of education. Guaranteeing the right to education was a matter of political will; unfortunately the violations of this right were all too frequent. States must make progress in establishing an inclusive education models in which cultural differences would be considered. A total of 3.1 per cent of the world population were migrants and most of them lived in developing countries. Cuba wanted the Special Rapporteur to refer to the education situation of those groups in the developed world, with particular attention being paid to children under the age of 18.

NILS ROSEMANN (Switzerland) requested further information from Mr. Ruggie on how to implement his recommendations on transnational corporations and human rights. More specifically, what could he propose to harmonize business interests and government regulations? On the issue of corporate social responsibility, there was clearly a need for businesses to be held accountable for human rights, in addition to reporting publicly on their performances and environmental practices. Switzerland asked what Mr. Ruggie’s priorities were for his final year and what were his suggestions for the future of this mandate. With regard to the right to education and the status of migrants, Switzerland pointed out that in 2007 it had adopted a law on integration in order to ensure equality of opportunity. Education training for migrants was an important concern for Switzerland and it was looking closely at the best practice recommendations mentioned in the report.

HARI PRASAD ODARI (Nepal) said the report of Mr. Munoz highlighted that over three per cent of the world’s population lived outside their country of origin. Depriving these over 200 million human beings of their right to education was a sheer undermining of the universality and indivisibility of human rights. Nepal therefore supported the call for the realization of national and international education obligations in order to meet the target of education for all by 2015. Nepal also shared Mr. Munoz’s concern that discriminating against migrants and asylum seekers regarding access to education resulted in them being further marginalized. As for Mr. Lumina’s report, the delegation commended the observations of the Independent Expert on how international debt relief efforts had contributed to poverty reduction and economic development in heavily indebted countries, as well as his insightful analysis of how “vulture funds” litigations deprived such countries of the debt relief benefits.

HEBA MOSTAFA RIZK (Egypt) said that the Council had engaged earlier in the dialogue on cultural rights and rights of migrants and therefore it was opportune that the Special Rapporteur on the right to education had chosen to present his report on the right to education in the context of migration, asylum-seeking and refugee situations. Egypt was looking forward to a more detailed analysis of those three contexts and the most appropriate approaches to address the right to education. Egypt said it was important to pay due notice to the cross-sectoral and transcending issue of human rights and transnational corporation and would like to hear more from the Special Rapporteur on the commonalities identified during his consultation and how they would help in formulating guiding principles for governments on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations. Egypt regretted the late submission of the report on the effects of foreign debt on the full enjoyment of human rights that had hampered its thorough examination. The highlight in the report of the collateral risk of vulture funds was appreciated and Egypt also welcomed the focus on measures to be taken nationally and internationally to address the negative impacts of such practices. The Independent Expert should further explore other realms and initiatives aimed at debt relief and whether they contributed or hampered the ability of States to fulfil their obligations for the promotion and protection of human rights.

OSITADINMA ANAEDU (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said that States bore the primary duty to protect their citizens from any corporate abuse. By the same token, there was a need for further elaboration on the point of corporate social responsibility as a prerequisite for avoiding any abuses by transnational corporations. The African Group also commended Mr. Munoz for his work and recognized the educational challenges faced by many migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, who were prone to marginalization and discrimination in the access to education. The African Group recognized that access to education promoted not only individual freedom and empowerment but also yielded development benefits, which often led to social integration. With regard to international debt, the African Group pointed out that the situation was catastrophic for most African nations who were caught in an inescapable spiral of debt due to unscrupulous creditors and unfair lending conditions. Debts should either be fully cancelled or significantly reduced as excessive repayments made it near impossible for African nations to achieve social and economic development.

CARLOS RAMIRO MARTINEZ ALVARADO (Guatemala) said that the Special Rapporteur on the right to education had taken a very interesting approach in his report. It should be highlighted that vulnerable groups, including migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers, were sometimes discriminated against, making it difficult to ensure development of individuals and of society more generally. Such vulnerable groups should receive education and be integrated into host societies, as this would also benefit destination countries economically, socially and culturally. The delegation recalled that Guatemala had committed itself to guaranteeing the right to education but acknowledged that much needed to be done. The Government of Guatemala was committed to continue working with the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right to education.

XAVIER BAERT (Belgium) thanked the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises and welcomed the report and the progress in operationalizing the “protect, respect and remedy” framework. Belgium would continue to support his work and was pleased to participate in informal brainstorming sessions on what States could do to help companies operating in conflict zones avoid getting drawn into human rights violations. Belgium was pleased that the Global Compact Network was launched in October in Brussels. Mr. Ruggie encouraged States to create non-formal system dispute resolutions and Belgium wanted to hear more about the most effective ways to create those systems. The Special Rapporteur also mentioned that in his final 2011 report he would provide a set of guiding principles for the operationalisation of the “protect, respect and remedy” framework and Belgium enquired how would Mr. Ruggie engage with Member States and other relevant stakeholders in developing those guidelines.

LIU KENFEI (China) said that State enterprises needed to cooperate with governments to ensure the promotion and protection of human rights. In China, many corporations had made substantial efforts in this regard, although the protection of workers was becoming a more acute problem in the country. China’s labour force was incredibly large and workers’ rights were being addressed by the Chinese Government. Corporate social responsibility was an important aspect of State-run enterprises, which were committed to promoting socio-economic development. The global economic crisis had led to many instances of instability and effective assistance should be provided, especially with regard to the debt problems of developing countries. China had undertaken efforts to relieve the debts of certain countries and in 2009, they cancelled expired debts in 32 countries. The Chinese Government always believed that equality in education was important to social and economic development. Mandatory education in rural areas and for the children of migrant workers in rural areas was an important issue for the Chinese Government. For instance, children in the countryside did not need to pay school fees.

MAX-OLIVIER GONNET (France) said France welcomed the quality of the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises. In France, an inter-ministerial committee on corporate social responsibility had been meeting three times a year since 2008 to discuss the issues dealt with in the different ministries. The idea of entrusting greater responsibility to a national human rights institution was also promising. In 2006 the French Government had adopted a national policy on corporate social responsibility that was based on the respect of human rights. Regarding the report, the passages on corporate social responsibility were a source of inspiration for the French Government. However, it would have been more correct to speak of the “duties” of corporations rather than their “responsibilities”. Moreover, the difference between minimal human rights obligations and the responsibility to voluntarily contribute to the respect of human rights seemed unclear.

BOUALEM CHEBIHI (Algeria) expressed Algeria’s appreciation for the pragmatism and realism of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations in discharging his mandate. Algeria asked the Special Rapporteur to suggest ways to put an end of abuse committed by some companies operating in areas of armed conflict. Algeria believed that the Council must address the end of his mandate in 2011. Algeria thanked Mr. Lumina for his report and said that the combat against “vulture funds” must be part of the reform of the international financial system. The right to education was enshrined in the Algerian Constitution and was a major priority for the Government. Education was free of charge and was guaranteed until the age of 16 to all citizens and all individuals living in Algeria. Algeria joined the appeal of the Special Rapporteur for universal ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. Algeria wanted to hear from the Special Rapporteur on what could be done to reconcile the enjoyment of the right to education for migrant workers and the fight against illegal migration.

YAKDHAN EL HABIB (African Union) said that the multicultural dimension of our societies needed to be reflected in national educational systems. The African Union believed that the right to education was crucial to ensuring the equality of professional opportunities. There was an important need to adapt to the ongoing changes in our societies. International cooperation would therefore be integral to this process. Due to the fact that Africa had the largest number of refugees and displaced persons, the African Union urged the international community to provide more financial support to African nations. All elements of the education system (curricula, teachers, books, etc.) should be made available to all. Finally, specific teacher training should be provided for those involved in the education of refugees.

FELIX PENA RAMOS (Venezuela) said that Venezuela acknowledged the efforts undertaken by the Special Rapporteur on the right to education, Mr. Munoz, in discharging his mandate. Venezuela’s Constitution recognized that education was a human right and a fundamental social obligation. Venezuela has acceded to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, among other instruments. Venezuela shared Mr. Munoz’s concern on the general discrimination against vulnerable groups in terms of education, on the need for educational systems be adapted to the norms that were established in international instruments, and on the inclusion of educational policies aimed at strengthening the capacity of communities. To conclude, the delegation said Venezuela explicitly allowed school registration for children without papers and guaranteed free access to integral and high-quality education.