HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL OPENS SIXTEENTH SESSION AND STARTS HIGH-LEVEL SEGMENT

The Human Rights Council this morning opened its sixteenth session, hearing from 14 high-level dignitaries and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, who said the Council was opening in historic turbulent times as massive popular movements in the Middle East demanded change for human rights and democracy. The illegal and excessively heavy-handed response of a number of governments was unacceptable and might amount to crimes under international law. The attacks must be independently investigated.

Ms. Pillay said to help prevent violence and maximize the new opportunities that the uprisings had created, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights could undertake advocacy and help in building institutional capacity, and ensure that victims of current and past abuses received the justice they were entitled as a matter of priority. The Council made a principled stand in convening a Special Session that resolved to mandate investigations into the violations of human rights and recommended a suspension of Libya’s membership from the Council. Noting that the Council had not explored its potential to the maximum, Ms. Pillay urged Member States to evaluate all realistic options which, together with the Universal Periodic Review and the work of the independent experts, might enable the Council to deal better with long-neglected human rights conditions and urgent situations.

Opening the sixteenth regular session of the Council, Sihasak Phuangketkeow, President of the Human Rights Council, said that the March session was considered the most important one of the year. It was hoped that the spirit of unity, already demonstrated last Friday during the Special Session on Libya, would prevail throughout this sixteenth session of the Council. The review of the Human Rights Council was a process in which many diverging views were expressed, and it would benefit from more bridges and more dialogue.

Joseph Deiss, President of the United Nations General Assembly, in a keynote statement, said the masses in the Arab world expected the United Nations Security Council and the Human Rights Council to defend human rights without compromise and without a procedural approach and they hoped that the Council could say that those who had been violating human rights should be held accountable. Now the Council had reached a critical stage in its development and had begun to debate various aspects of the relationship between the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly. In Geneva and New York there had been no call for fundamental reforms and if changes would be deemed necessary they should be practical in nature to better discharge the Council’s capabilities.

Micheline Calmy-Rey, President of Switzerland and Head of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, also in a keynote speech, said the international community had to act to answer the aspirations of the men and women determined to see their fundamental rights become a reality. The disappointment of their hopes was inacceptable. The engagement in favour of human rights was useful for those who wished to have a better life and to end up seeing their fundamental rights recognized one day. The images spoke for themselves and despite the sufferance of the Libyan population the joy of the population that had been released from a repressive regime could only reinforce her opinion that the engagement of the international community was necessary and useful. Historic upheavals had taught the international community that durable stability and development were possible only in societies where the authorities respected human rights. The numbers of those killed and wounded in the peaceful demonstrations from the use of excessive force by the authorities was shocking. Whether those in the Middle East, in North Africa or in other regions of the world, these developments were unacceptable and Switzerland firmly condemned them.

The other dignitaries which addressed the Council in the high-level segment were Angelino Garzon, Vice-President of Colombia; Kevin Rudd, Foreign Minister of Australia; Sergey Lavrov, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation; Ahmed Naseem, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of the Maldives; Ramon Jauregui, Minister of the Presidency of Spain; Patricia Espinosa Cantellano, Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Mexico; Mahinda Samarasinghe, Minister of Plantation Industries of Sri Lanka; Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, Minister of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation of South Africa; Maria do Rosario Nunes, Minister and Head of the Human Rights Secretariat of Brazil; Radhoane Nouicer, State Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Tunisia; Joao Cravinho, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Portugal; and Catherine Ashton, High Representative for Foreign Policy and Security of the European Union.

The two issues which most speakers raised were the popular demands in the Middle East and North Africa seeking democratic reforms, and the ongoing review process of the Council.
Human rights and international humanitarian law should be guaranteed for all peoples of the world, speakers said. The violence unleashed by the Libyan authorities against their own people was condemned and it was clear that gross and systematic violations of human rights had been perpetrated in Libya. More must be done in addition to the resolutions of the Human Rights Council and of the Security Council and the community of nations had a clear responsibility to protect innocent people in Libya and remove Muammar Gaddafi and his associates from power and hold them accountable for their crimes. Concerning the review process of the Council, speakers said that the Council must ensure that the current review process was conducted and finalized in an open, transparent and fair manner and the Council owed it to humanity and to the victims of human rights abuses and violations to act in a manner that would ensure that the victims had maximum protection, adequate remedies and zero tolerance of impunity.

The Council today is holding a non-stop meeting from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. During the afternoon meeting, it will continue with its high-level segment.

Opening Statements

SIHASAK PHUANGKETKEOW, President of the Human Rights Council, in his opening statement, said that the March session was considered the most important one of the year. It was significant to note that at the end of this session, new mandate-holders would be appointed, including two new mandates on the right to freedom and on discrimination against women. It was hoped that the spirit of unity, already demonstrated last Friday during the Special Session on Libya, would prevail throughout this sixteenth session of the Council. The review of the Human Rights Council was a process in which many diverging views were expressed, and which would benefit from more bridges and more dialogue. Still, it resulted in better understanding between the members and would help this process in the future.

NAVI PILLAY, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that this session of the Human Rights Council was opening in historic turbulent times as massive popular movements in the Middle East demanded change for human rights and democracy. It was a matter of great sadness that so much blood had been shed to usher in change. The illegal and excessively heavy-handed response of a number of governments was unacceptable and might amount to crimes under international law. The attacks must be independently investigated. United Nations Security Council resolution 1970 of last Saturday gave the international community a solid platform for action. It was important that the changes spurred by the uprisings took root before former entrenched interests began to reassert themselves or new threats emerged. Protestors had voiced concern over the fact that the international community had all too often prioritized the stability of the political status quo and unhampered trade in natural resources over human rights. The interlocutors in the Middle East knew that when the euphoria had worn thin, the hard task of rebuilding trust in institutions of governance and among communities needed to start in earnest. The international community bore the great responsibility of extending its support in words and deeds to assist such indispensable reforms.

In order to help prevent violence and maximize the new opportunities that the uprisings had created, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights could undertake advocacy and help in building institutional capacity, and ensure that victims of current and past abuses received the justice they were entitled as a matter of priority. The recent protests had been sparked by harsh economic conditions, a suffocating political environment, lack to justice, and a sense of hopelessness. Seeking responses to such conditions and helping others pursuing solutions fit squarely within the Council’s mandate to promote and protect all human rights for all. The Council made a principled stand in convening a Special Session that resolved to mandate investigations into the violations of human rights and recommended a suspension of Libya’s membership from the Council. The Council should not relax its vigilance over Libya as the threat of violent reprisals against civilians still loomed.
The High Commissioner said she felt compelled to make this point, since the Council had embarked in the first review of its work and expressed the hope that this review would become a springboard for better honing the Council’s skills and tools. Without doubt, the work of the Council had led to significant achievements. The Universal Periodic Review was its most cited innovative feature which embodied the principles of universality, equality and cooperation. Yet the review was just a means to an end, and only one among the many tools the Council possessed to advance the protection of human rights.

Noting that the Council had not explored its potential to the maximum, Ms. Pillay urged Member States to evaluate all realistic options which, together with the Universal Periodic Review and the work of the independent experts, might enable the Council to deal better with long-neglected human rights conditions and urgent situations. As the Middle East experience showed, it was invariably the former that ignited the latter. It was important to recall that this body commanded credibility through action - nothing else. Dialogue and collaboration beyond political considerations and partisanship were crucial. The High Commissioner invited the Council to close the gap between pledging rhetoric and willingness to actually deliver.

JOSEPH DEISS, President of the United Nations General Assembly, said that he was fully engaged in reviewing the work of the Council and that human rights was at the heart of the United Nations mission along with peace and development. As emphasized by Kofi Annam in his report, Greater Freedom, `there has never been development without security and there has never been security without development and there will be neither security nor development without respect for the rights of man’. These three pillars had been mutually reinforcing as had been evidenced by the events unfolding now in the Arab world. The masses in the Arab world expected the United Nations Security Council and the Human Rights Council to defend human rights without compromise and without a procedural approach and they hoped that the Council could say that those who had been violating human rights should be held accountable.

Mr. Deiss said the establishment of the Human Rights Council five years ago placed human rights at a higher level in the United Nations system and a strong Human Rights Council had been indispensible for meeting the expectations of those throughout the world who had risen up against human rights violations. The people in the world had reaffirmed the faith in fundamental human rights. The legitimacy and credibility of the United Nations as a whole had been at stake. This should be indispensible if the United Nations was to become a central actor in global governance. This was evidenced by the Special Session meeting of the Human Rights Council on Friday. The General Assembly would be meeting on 1 March to follow up on the recommendations in the Council’s resolution. The Member States had been the strength of the Human Rights Council and it was up to these States to commit themselves to strengthening human rights, this started by example, there must not be double standards. It was their duty to respect the aspirations and hopes of all people, a moral duty on behalf of mankind. The Council had conducted many reviews of the States’ obligations and commitments, and it had been quite a positive balance sheet. Now the Council had reached a critical stage in its development and had begun to debate various aspects of the relationship between the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly. In Geneva and New York there had been no call for fundamental reforms and if changes would be deemed necessary they should be practical in nature to better discharge the Council’s capabilities. Mr. Deiss said he was pleased that the Working Group adopted the review of the Council by consensuses; the next stage would be the adoption by the Council and transmission to New York so that the entire process was completed by July of this year.

MICHELINE CALMY-REY, President of Switzerland and Head of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, expressed her condolences to the families of those who had lost their lives in Libya and gave homage to the memory and the courage of the victims of the violence. The international community had to act to answer the aspirations of the men and women determined to see their fundamental rights become a reality. The disappointment of their hopes was inacceptable. The engagement in favour of human rights was useful for those who wished to have a better life and to end up seeing their fundamental rights recognized one day. The images spoke for themselves and despite the sufferance of the Libyan population the joy of the population that had been released from a repressive regime could only reinforce her opinion that the engagement of the international community was necessary and useful. Historic upheavals had taught the international community that durable stability and development were possible only in societies where the authorities respected human rights. The numbers of those killed and wounded in the peaceful demonstrations from the use of excessive force by the authorities was shocking. Whether those in the Middle East, in North Africa or in other regions of the world, these developments were unacceptable and Switzerland firmly condemned them.

Ms. Calmy-Rey said Switzerland particularly condemned the extrajudicial executions of demonstrators by Libyan security forces. The information available today made one believe that crimes against humanity had been committed and continued to be committed by the Libyan Government. These violations had to stop immediately. The use of indiscriminate violence against populations calling for freedom and democracy and against populations peacefully expressing their desire for social justice was inadmissible.

High-Level Segment

ANGELINO GARZON, Vice-President of Colombia, said that Colombia was making significant progress in the promotion and protection of human rights, including giving continuity to the Government’s dialogue with indigenous peoples and further developing the constitution in a consultative manner. The Government was also promoting “disarmament of the word” which meant respect for difference and the possibility of expressing diversity of opinions in a context of tolerance. As a Government, the imperatives were on the promotion and protection of human rights, respect for the environment, the rule of law and the fight against organised crime. Colombia reiterated its commitment to the Human Rights Council and the protection of human rights defenders. The work on the promotion and protection of human rights also implied the need to create conditions for all Colombians to live better. With the vision of Colombia as a country of progress, the Government aimed to increase economic growth by six per cent and to reduce unemployment. Some challenges still persisted and the Government had decided to continue combating the violence that had plagued the country over the past 60 years or so. With this purpose in mind, the Government was working on reducing poverty, achieving Millennium Development Goals, and being vigorous in the fight against corruption – an ally of organised crime.

Colombia was a country which wanted peace and had emphatically condemned the guerrillas and their practices of terrorism and kidnapping. Colombia wanted to become a country with zero tolerance for the violation of human rights and international humanitarian law, for abuse and ill treatment of children and violence against women. Colombia reiterated its recognition of the Universal Periodic Review which had enabled Colombia to achieve progress in ensuring human rights enjoyment for its citizens. The Special Procedures were necessary to have the guarantee of objectivity and impartiality, Mr. Garzon said, reiterating the commitment to the promotion and protection of women’s rights and in particular the struggle against maternal mortality. Human rights and international humanitarian law should be guaranteed for all peoples of the world. The actions taken against the people of Libya were unacceptable. Colombia was determined to continue to make progress along the path to the consolidation of a comprehensive policy for human rights and international humanitarian law. The Government had renewed the mandate of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for another three years and, together with others, had called for the National Conference on Human Rights with the purpose of working together with civil society and the international community on the approval of a common agenda and the creation of a national human rights office or centre.

KEVIN RUDD, Foreign Minister of Australia, said that he had been honored to stand in Tahrir Square in the middle of Cairo where the people of Egypt led by its strong youth rose up to bring about fundamental change. The United Nations was born in Geneva where the peoples of the world first gathered as a League of Nations, only to see this first experiment in the parliament of humankind collapse in the carnage of war. People tried again. And so was born the United Nations and from its earliest years the Universal Declaration of Human Rights had been one of its fundamental compacts which had held that all peoples had the right to freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, an adequate standard of living, the right to take part in the government of their countries, either directly or indirectly or through freely chosen representative and that the will of the people should be the basis of the authority of government and that this should be expressed in periodic and genuine elections and that should be by universal and equal suffrage and by secret vote.

These universal rights first laid out in 1948 had been the same ones now sought by the young people of Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab world. The Universal Declaration said that these rights should not be applicable to particular cultures, societies or a point in history. The people of the world had now turned to the United Nations to ask what now should be done to ensure this. Australia would support the actions of the Human Rights Council’s decision to suspend Libya from the Council together with the decision to convene an international commission of inquiry to establish the nature and extent of human rights abuses in Libya. The Human Rights Council had called on all States to provide assistance to the people of Libya and Australia would make a contribution to the International Committee of the Red Cross and it would also embrace a no fly zone to help protect the Libyan people from the violence that they had already experienced from units of the Libyan air force. The Security Council must keep all other options on the table to deal with the unfolding events in Libya. Australia was a middle power with global interests and values that had been reflected in what had been called good international citizenship - the building, sustaining and enhancement of the global and regional rules based-order which had embraced the full spectrum of Australia’s international engagements, including arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation, climate change, economic development, trade liberalization, humanitarian assistance and the maintenance and enhancement of international human rights and humanitarian law. This Human Rights Council was charged with an important mandate and as the hopes contained in the Universal Declaration were echoed across the world, the mandate of this Council should require it to stand up and be counted.

SERGEY LAVROV, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, said that the recent turbulence events in certain regions of the world, including the Middle East, had once again clearly demonstrated that a stable and secure world order and sustainable development should rest upon the processes of democratization and comprehensive modernization of societies. Mass protests across the Middle East and North Africa countries had exposed a range of problems that had piled up for decades, first of all, poverty, unemployment and unguaranteed social and economic rights in general. These problems should be addressed by the people of the affected countries, without any coercion or external interference, in peaceful forms and within legal framework, thought national dialogue and public consensus on the ways for long-overdue transformation. The use of military force against civilians was unacceptable and the Russian Federation condemned such violence, and demanded its immediate cessation and observance of international humanitarian law. The Russian Federation clearly expressed their attitude towards those events, and also welcomed the principled stand taken by the Human Rights Council. Democratization and modernization were the tasks faced not only by individual countries, but by the entire system of international relations as well. The realities of an emerging new fairer polycentric world required the development of multilateral institutions which should promote equitable cooperation and joint search for solutions to emerging problems.

The Russian Federation was interested in broadening human rights dialogue and cooperating actively with relevant treaties bodies, the Human Rights Council Special Procedures and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The recent visit to Russia by High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay had taken place in a constructive and business-like manner. If the international community wanted human rights to become an integral part of their life, it was necessary to take a fresh look at their moral dimension. This dimension incorporated a set of traditional values that had found their reflection in all world religions, various cultures and customs. The objective nexus between human rights and traditional values of humanity should contribute to strengthening further universalization of the concept of human rights. Russia had initiated in the United Nations system a discussion on this topic, to which many States had responded with interest.

AHMED NASEEM, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of the Maldives, congratulated the courageous and determined people of Tunisia and Egypt for asserting their fundamental rights and freedoms and for believing in a better future. As a Muslim State which had recently undergone its own quieter democratic revolution, the Maldives offered its support to democratic friends in the new Tunisia and the new Egypt and called on the international community to assist both countries at this crucial moment in their history. The new Islamic world being built from the Sahara to the Red Sea and beyond demanded a paradigm shift both in terms how the Muslims perceived and understood their own societies, but also in terms of how the outside world viewed and interacted with them. At the most fundamental level this entailed rejection of governance models based on central control and management and the acceptance of an open society without precondition. This lesson must be learned by the Islamic world and the Maldives appealed to all the governments of Muslim States to listen and respond to the aspiration of their peoples. The outside powers must learn the lesson as well, and the Muslim awakening was a signal that double standards of preaching democracy while at the same time supporting the regimes whose survival was premised on the suppression of those ideals would be no longer tolerated.

The Maldives strongly condemned the violence unleashed by the Libyan authorities against their own people and said it was clear that gross and systematic violations of human rights had been perpetrated in Libya. The Maldives refused to remain silent as hundreds of Muslim brothers and sisters were abused and killed. More must be done in addition to the resolutions of the Human Rights Council and of the Security Council and the community of nations had a clear responsibility to protect innocent people in Libya and remove Muammar Gaddafi and his associates from power and hold them accountable for their crimes. The Maldives asked if this Council and the treaty body system were capable of enforcing international human rights law, of securing accountability for human rights violations and of providing redress to victims. The Maldives, Switzerland, Uruguay and others would begin at this session a process of reflection and would ask if the current international human rights system, vulnerable as it was to politicization and subjectivity, had the tools it needed to deliver real and effective remedy to individuals whose rights had been violated. Mr. Naseem concluded by saying that it was important not only for the Council but also for the people on the streets of Tripoli, and their neighbours in Tunisia and Egypt and for all those who lived under oppressive regimes, to believe that there was an international human rights system which could help them, protect them and offer remedy and redress.

TRINIDAD JIMENEZ GARCIA-HERRERA, Minister of the Presidency of Spain, said the Council must support the current demands for human rights by the people in the Middle East and in North of Africa and there should be a doubling of efforts in demanding and insisting on these rights for the defenceless populations, as evidenced by the Special Session of the Council held last Friday and the resolution adopted by consensus which strengthened the message of unity presented by the international community and which would serve to avoid such future violations. The sanctions adopted by the Security Council on Saturday should be taken seriously and the International Court should also take up these accusations. Spain considered that the recent populist movements in Tunisia and Egypt should continue with full respect to human rights and freedoms and Spain would spare no effort to provide its full support and cooperation to the Council along with its European Union partners.

Spain had highlighted a number of issues as a concern for their foreign policy, one was terrorism, as evidenced by the September 11 attacks in the United States and the March 2004 attacks in Spain which both highlighted the need for respect of human rights in combating terrorism. Spain believed there was a lacuna in the marginalization of the human rights of victims of terrorism. Freedom of religion was also an issue and Spain recognized that there were problems for various religions, which underwent persecution and violence and Spain would like to hear the Council reject these human rights violations. In the field of economic and social rights, Spain insisted on the right to the availability of drinking water as a human right and States’ obligations in this connection. The food crisis was another problem highlighting the vulnerability of all persons and the need to be protected against hunger. Spain was also firmly committed to gender equality and had been a principal donor to the new United Nation’s Women. Despite the commitments at the Beijing conference in 1995, there was still discrimination against girls and women who were not able to compete equally or to live a life that was been free of violence. Spain also argued for the abolition of the death penalty as a priority. The Spanish Government considered that the death penalty was a violation of human rights. Another priority was the elimination of all forms of discrimination based on sexual orientation. Spain supported renewing mandates on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Myanmar and Iran. The human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was another concern for Spain which argued that the international community must assist the Congolese authorities with these challenges.

In order to comply fully with its mandate the Human Rights Council must be able to deal urgently with human rights violations, in particular when there was a chronic attack; furthermore the Council must also make recommendations, taking an active role on prevention and being an early warning mechanism. The Council had not yet strengthened this capacity. Spain would continue to provide political and moral commitment to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

PATRICIA ESPINOSA CANTELLANO, Secretary of External Relations of Mexico, reiterated the deep commitment of Mexico to the defense and protection of human rights, in particular for peoples and groups who were in a vulnerable situation. Women, children, migrants, persons with disabilities but also those persons struggling for fundamental freedom could count on the support of Mexico. The work done by the Council was vital in achieving these goals and for these reasons they were making an effort to improve their institutional architecture. Mexico was convinced that the Human Rights Council would ensure that in each United Nations country there would be a bit of protection of human rights and these goals would not be attainable if in this room polarization, sterile confrontation and ideological attitudes prevailed. For this reason Mexico made an appeal to the States represented here to hold a dialogue with imagination, maturity and much wiliness to strengthen the Human Rights Council in order to ensure a real and growing impact on the quality of life of all human beings in the world.

Democracy and human rights went hand by hand and they were the two sides of the same coin and at the same time practicing values and democracy provided the best guarantee for the full observance of the fundamental human rights. In Mexico the democratic consolidation had been the result of the action of a plural society which had promoted changes in the political and social coexistence in the country. For its part the State had channeled this process through institutions, in which the strengthening of human rights was fundamental. Today Mexico could count on independent institutions that guaranteed the full exercise of the political rights and the scrutiny of the public function. Mexico had a strong, participatory and hard working civil society which monitored the Government’s actions in all the spheres of the national life. Mexico knew that in the matter of human rights, international scrutiny helped to overcome old habits. Mexico was working with the international community to eradicate impunity and impel the respect of the fundamental human rights of all human beings. One example of this was the struggle undertaken by President Felipe Calderòn against organized crime. The Mexican Government used all its capacity in this fight against organized transactional crime, a fight which also required cooperation with other States and which required investment in material and human resources.

MAHINDA SAMARASINGHE, Minister of Plantation Industries of Sri Lanka, said that the massive humanitarian operations that had been conducted during the final stages of eradicating terrorism in Sri Lanka had focused on ensuring the safety and security of all civilians. The State, complemented by bilateral partners and multilateral agencies, had begun delivering on its responsibility of caring for approximately 300,000 internally displaced persons. Considerable actions had been taken by the Government to facilitate the restoration of normality in the lives of returnees who were each provided with a “package of support” which contained food items, material assistance to rebuild houses, irrigation and livelihood support including the provision of land for cultivation and special credit schemes. Sri Lanka’s steadfast commitment to further the promotion and protection of human rights was enshrined in the proposed National Action Plan, the implementation of which would start in the near future. The Bureau of the Commissioner-General of Rehabilitation had been further strengthened with a full time Commissioner-General vested with the special mandate of rehabilitating and reintegrating ex-combatants, including child combatants.

Sri Lanka had started to reap the dividends of peace exemplified by a large number of development programmes to enable the economic uplift of the people, which would then underpin their eventual political empowerment. Sri Lanka was the second fastest growing economy in the world and now enjoyed middle-income emerging market status. An important step in the Government’s reconciliation programme was “The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission” appointed by the President and which had commenced its work in August 2010 with an emphasis on restorative justice. The Commission would also focus on determining responsibility regarding past events related to the conflict. Sri Lanka noted with concern that remnants of the defeated Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam international network continued its activities, Mr. Samarasinghe said, and hastened to strike a note of caution against being lulled into a sense of complacency. He further assured the Council that the rollback process of the emergency regulations would be concluded in appropriate and timely manner. In conclusion, Mr. Samarasinghe noted that three of Sri Lanka’s reports to treaty bodies had or would been examined in the course of 2010 and 2011 and said that the Government was now examining the recommendations of respective committees in order to implement them as appropriate under the aegis of the National Action Plan.

MAITE NKOANA-MASHABANE, Minister of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation of South Africa, said the challenges that the Human Rights Council faced could not be overemphasized and that as they gathered here today they must not fail those many people who were currently gathered in the streets. South Africa attached great importance to the promotion of human rights as contained in the South African constitution. This year South Africa had identified job creation through sustainable and shared growth as a central theme in addition to the other priorities in the areas of health care, education, combating crime and corruption and accelerating rural development and land reform. These priorities should attend not only to South Africa’s domestic challenges but should also bring the South African people human dignity and human rights.

South Africa had a well functioning Human Rights Commission in addition to other constitutional bodies that carried out duties in the service of the ordinary person such as the Independent Electoral Commission which had earned respect domestically and internationally. South Africa had invited all the human rights mechanisms to visit and carry out their mandates and South Africa was among one of the first countries to be peer reviewed by this council and by the African Peer Review Mechanism. The Council must ensure that the current review process was conducted and finalized in an open, transparent and fair manner and the Council owed it to humanity and to the victims of human rights abuses and violations to act in a manner that would ensure that the victims had maximum protection, adequate remedies and zero tolerance of impunity. South Africa had watched the wave of democratic demand as represented by popular demonstrations in the north of the African continent and parts of the Middle East and reaffirmed its support for the pronouncements and measures taken in response to events currently unfolding in Libya.
2011 has been designated the year of people of African descent through General Assembly resolution 64/169 and South Africa welcomed the panel discussion to take place during the high-level segment. South Africa was itself a product of the international struggle against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and it gave its full support to strengthening the Council so that it was be able to carry out its mandate.

MARIA DO ROSARIO NUNES, Head of the Human Rights Secretary of Brazil, said the seed of democracy had always been present in the hearts of the Brazilian people, even in most difficult moments. As President Dilma affirmed in her inaugural speech, their foreign policy was based on the classic values of the Brazilian diplomatic tradition: the promotion of peace, the respect to the principle of non-intervention, the defense of human rights and the strengthening of multilateralism. For Brazil there was no hierarchy among economic, social and cultural rights on one hand and civil and political rights on the other. She said that every human being had the right to food, to decent work, to adequate housing and to social peace. At the same time, every human being had the right to freedom of opinion and expression and to choose her/his government. It was in the struggle for the exercise of these liberties that the Brazilian people overcame an authoritarian regime and regained democracy. This struggle resulted in the suffering of thousands of people and in the loss of many lives. To these lives they always owed their homage and recognition. The right to memory and truth was an integral aspect of human rights and a fundamental instrument for the strengthening of democracy. The crisis that had shaken political regimes in the Middle East and Northern Africa did not arrive without a sign of alert. No government would be sustained by force or by violence and no leadership would last amidst social exclusion, unemployment and poverty. Moreover, she added that no people would bear in silence the violation of their fundamental rights.

People were perishing in defense of freedom and human rights. The loss of these lives was a loss to humanity as a whole. It was necessary to recognize that, for many years, strategic alliances had maintained the silence about human rights violations. These situations had been absent from this Council’s deliberations. Brazil favoured that the Human Rights Council debate human rights violations in all countries, wherever they took place. But it was important that non-selectivity and non-politicization prevailed in its deliberation. In this time of change, Brazil wished the aspirations of protesters to be met thought political dialogue. The choice in the Arab world was not between extremisms. They needed to combat stereotypes and recognize the capacity of each people to face their biggest challenges and build alternatives to peace.

RADHOUANE NOUICER, State Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Tunisia, said it was a privilege to speak on behalf the new Tunisia which represented a definite break from the despotic regime. The Tunisian revolution had crowned a successful struggle of generations of Tunisians who had always believed that the rightful place of this nation was among those who strove to promote and protect of human rights. Speaking on behalf of free Tunisia and in language free from tyranny which had burdened it for so long, Mr. Noucier said that the changes made it possible for the people to exercise their rights and had ensured the balanced and equitable development of the country. Those were the objectives of the roadmap of the new interim Government. Tunisia was grateful to all who came forward with support. The transitional government was working to strengthen the security throughout the country and ensure continuity of the State and its institutions, which was necessary to calm the people and ensure that economic activities continued. At the same time, the country was preparing for the major event of the first multi-party elections which would lead to the establishment of the new government, based on transparency and the rule of law and with the participation of all. The challenge of democratic transformation was being tackled and a number of major decisions had been undertaken, including ascension to a number of international instruments and protocols, consideration of withdrawal of reservations on Convention against Torture, and setting up of a committee for political reforms and a committee for the inquiry into corruption and bribes.

The Government of Tunisia had called on the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the International Committee of the Red Cross and Human Rights Watch to conduct an inquiry into human rights violations. The firm commitment of Tunisia to cooperate with the Human Rights Council and other United Nations bodies would lead to the expansion of relations and Tunisia extended an open-ended invitation to all Special Procedures. Tunisia intended to respect its commitment to examining complaints and to hold accountable all those who committed human rights violations. In connection with the upcoming elections, Tunisia extended a request for assistance to the United Nations and it was open to receiving assistance from other actors in order to successfully implement this important event. The transitional Government was working to ensure that it was up to meeting the challenges, in cooperation with all, despite the enormity of the task whereby the old challenges, such as protecting the environment, had joined the new ones. Many citizens were losing patience and were claiming compensation for damages incurred in the past. The transitional Government was organising a symposium in May this year to present new realities and demonstrate the work programme for the transitional period. The symposium would also be an opportunity to present the resources of Tunisia that would be put into this process, Mr. Noucier concluded.

JOAO CRAVINHO, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Portugal, said that Portugal was a firm supporter of the independence and of the relevance of the Human Rights Council, as well as of the strengthening of the human rights pillar of the United Nations. Portugal had actively participated in the work of the Council since its creation, and they believed that the time had come to present their candidature to become a member of this body. Portugal wished to contribute with their voice and above all with their actions to help fulfill the Council’s mandate as the main pillar of the international architecture in human rights, and they hoped to count on the support of the United Nations. Portugal wanted the Council to make a difference in the real life of the individuals whose rights they were here to protect and promote. And they wanted to work together with all other members and observers, national human rights institutions, non-governmental organizations and civil society representatives to achieve this end.

Portugal had undergone its Universal Periodic Review at the sixth session of the Universal Periodic Review Working Group in December 2009 and would later in this Council’s session update all members and observers on the progress made in implementing its recommendations. They had taken this review very seriously and that was why it would use this opportunity to briefly comment on the work Portugal had done regarding two of the main recommendations made. During their review, Portugal announced the intention to establish a national human rights commission. This inter-ministerial body had now been set up and had been productively working for the past year to coordinate the implementation at the national level of all their international human rights obligations and voluntary commitments. The other recommendation was to ensure the active involvement of civil society in the follow-up to the Universal Periodic Review. To this end, the next meeting of their national human rights commission at the end of March would be open to civil society representatives in order to discuss, in an open and transparent way, the follow-up to the recommendations of the Universal Periodic Review.

Portugal had been following closely the developments in Tunisia and they supported the political transition in that country towards a democratic society. They welcomed in particular the decision by the Tunisian authorities to sign up to the main international human rights instruments. In their national capacity, and as a member of the European Union, Portugal was ready to cooperate with the Tunisian authorities in all fields and in particular in the setting up of a democratic political system with effective mechanisms for the protection and promotion of human rights. They believed that the Human Rights Council should also decide to cooperate with the Tunisian authorities in this area.

CATHERINE ASHTON, High Representative for Foreign Policy and Security of the European Union, said this was a time of historic change, and people across the Middle East and beyond were standing up for the core human aspiration: to be able to shape their own lives politically and economically. Their calls for the respect of fundamental rights, for dignity, accountability, justice and jobs must be heeded for they were just and would not go away. It was a responsibility of this Council to ensure that the oft-stated intentions were translated into real action and real progress. The attention right now was focused on Libya and rightly so. The presence of so many high-level dignitaries from around the world reflected that the massive violence against peaceful demonstrators shocked the conscience. The outcome of the Council’s Special Session on Libya was a strong one and Ms. Ashton was pleased that the Council concluded on Friday to form an independent international inquiry to back the steps to suspend the membership of Libya in this Council. Those were important steps, but more was clearly needed. The violence and repression must stop and this was the view of not only the European Union but of the international community’s highest authority. The European Union would ensure the swift implementation of the Security Council’s measures and was already working on the European Union’s restrictive measures that would come into effect very soon.

It was not only in Libya that the respect for basic human rights needed to be ensured, Ms. Ashton said, noting the situation in several countries across the Mediterranean where the people and their courage must receive full support. People’s rights were at risk in several countries, including in Iran, Belarus, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and many other places. The European Union was deeply concerned at the situation in the Middle East including the Occupied Palestinian Territories. This Council had some way to go in living up to its mandate. That was why a real and substantive outcome of the review process was needed. The test of success was simple and it was not per se whether they passed resolutions or established new procedures. What truly mattered were outputs and the real test was whether a difference on the ground was made. The European Union was sometime accused of exporting European values. Ms. Ashton rejected those accusations and noted that those were universal values and it must not be forgotten that people from all over the world were equally passionate about their rights and their freedoms. One of the greatest challenges was to help countries to build institutions able to defend and promote human rights. Those were historic times and it was easy to be dazzled by the promise of change, but to live up to the promises a gap must be narrowed between the magnitude of the challenges and the minutiae of political debates, between the expectations and the ability to deliver, between the serenity of Geneva and the events just two hours flight from here. What mattered was not per se the number of resolutions passed but the results achieved together on the ground.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC11/008E