SPECIAL SESSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL ON DARFUR CONTINUES GENERAL DEBATE

The Human Rights Council this afternoon continued its special session on the situation of human rights in Darfur, hearing speakers emphasize both the responsibility to protect, as well as the need to act cooperatively and impartially in addressing situations of grave human rights violations.

Several speakers observed that the future reputation of the Council would be determined, to a significant degree, by the credibility of this special session and the clarity and effectiveness of its outcomes. A number of delegations saw the present special session – which had been supported by a wide range of delegations from all regional groups – as an opportunity to move away from the past practice of selectivity and partiality. The objective should not be to point fingers and apportion blame, but to build confidence among all actors, to address the difficulties faced by the humanitarian aid teams, help the Sudanese to implement a disarmament programme, and enhance the State’s capacity to deal with the human rights aspects of the crisis.

Delegations differed, however, as to the facts on the ground, and consequently held diverging views on the composition of a mission to be sent to Darfur. What was becoming increasingly obvious, one delegation noted, was that most of the information provided by one side about the situation in Darfur to the Council was contested by the other. Everyone agreed that a firsthand assessment mission had to be sent. But while some felt it had to establish the facts on the ground, others felt that they had been sufficiently established – the information provided by the Secretary-General, the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the regular reports of the African Union Mission in the Sudan left no doubt as to the gravity of the human rights violations being committed and the suffering of the involved communities. For those delegations the added-value of the expert assessment mission to Darfur would be to evaluate the human rights consequences of the crisis, and to propose recommendations to put an end to all ongoing human rights law and humanitarian law violations and to guarantee that the perpetrators of such violations would be brought to justice in a timely and effective manner.

Speaking this afternoon were the representatives of Japan, Senegal, Brazil, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Jordan, Libya, Egypt, Costa Rica, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Ireland, Albania, Sweden, African Union, Oman, Lebanon, Chad, Syria, Holy See, Slovakia, Spain, Luxembourg, Yemen, Italy, Armenia, Portugal, Australia, Estonia, Chile, Iran, United States, Slovenia, Hungary, Denmark, Greece, Norway, Israel, Palestine, New Zealand, Belgium, Nicaragua and Liecthenstein. Also speaking were representatives from the following United Nations departments, funds and programmes: United Nations Population Fund, United Nations Children's Fund, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, and Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Iran spoke in a right of reply.

When the Council meets on Wednesday, 13 December, at 10 a.m., it will continue the special session’s general debate on the human rights situation in Darfur.


General Debate

SHIGERU ENDO (Japan) said that, to improve the situation in Darfur and to end impunity, it was necessary that those responsible for gross violations of human rights be held accountable. Japan had already been working actively for peace in the Darfur region and had extended a considerable amount of assistance to date. Japan had decided to send $30 million in aid to Sudan, for the Darfur region, on 1 December. Japan believed that an objective, independent fact-finding mission to establish the facts on the ground was needed. Therefore Japan supported dispatching a mission of experts to do so. Japan would continue its efforts for peace and stability in Sudan.

CHEIKH TIDIANE THIAM (Senegal) said the convening of the special session - the fourth - showed that the new human rights body was carrying out its task properly. Today, attention was drawn to the human rights and humanitarian situation in Darfur. The situation was a difficult one and needed the support of the international community to find a solution. The African Union, the United Nations and other international partners had been collaborating with the Government of Sudan to bring peace. The logistical and financial challenges faced by the African Union force, whose mandate in Darfur had been renewed for six months, could not be eased without the support of the donor countries and without the implementation of the Abuja Peace Agreement. Senegal had made available troops in Sudan to help contain the crisis.

The Council should take into account the concerns expressed by the United Nations Secretary-General and should act accordingly. International organizations should have unhindered access to the vulnerable groups in order to provide humanitarian assistance, particularly to the internally displaced persons. The lack of security in Darfur had also been a source of concern. It was necessary that the parties to the conflict should renounce all acts of violence. The Council should discuss the make up and composition of the assessment mission and it should work in collaboration with the Sudanese Government.

SERGIO ABREU E LIMA FLORENCIO (Brazil) said the convening of the special session was very timely, and confirmed the Council’s capacity to address the world’s most pressing human rights situations, with wide support from Council members. The situation in Darfur had been followed with increasing concern. There were accusations of attacks on the civilian population, widespread impunity, and violations of international humanitarian law. An impartial basis needed to be established to deal with this crisis in a way that actually stood to benefit the innocent civilians, women and children who were suffering most. The role of the United Nations and of the Human Rights Council in particular was critical. There would be no prospects for long-lasting peace in the region without the active, and enlightened, involvement of the international community.

The Council needed first-hand objective information in order to make a thorough assessment of the situation. Therefore, there should be a Council mission to Sudan. The United Nations response to the current crisis, including that of the Council, would not be adequate, however, if it did not take account of all human rights-related aspects. The objective should not be to point fingers and apportion blame, but to build confidence among all actors, to address the difficulties faced by the humanitarian aid teams, help the Sudanese to implement a disarmament programme, and enhance the State’s capacity to deal with the human rights aspects of the crisis. The Council should confront challenges such as the one in Darfur through objective facts and figures, and the kind of balanced analysis that could only be provided by eminent experts of established reputation.

ELCHIN AMIRBAYOV (Azerbaijan) welcomed the fact that for the first time a special session of the Human Rights Council had been convened as a joint cross-regional endeavour, involving East and West, North and South. The fact that 34 Member States of the Council had requested the convocation of this session presented a unique opportunity for this newly created body to display the much expected sense of collegiality and establish the atmosphere of mutual confidence crucial for the achievement of an effective and far-reaching outcome that would be able not only to strengthen the credibility of the Council, but also to have a tangible positive effect on developments in Darfur.

The Sudanese Government had exerted dedicated efforts to implement the Darfur Peace Agreement of 5 May 2006, while other parties had declined from joining it and continued to engage in rebellion activities resulting in numerous casualties and loss of life. Given the complexity and tragic nature of the conflict one should refrain from depicting the situation in black and white terms. They needed to be comprehensive and consistent in assessing the human rights situation and concentrate on the opportunities rather than the failures of the ongoing efforts aimed at improving the situation. Regarding the mission, if it were to succeed it should be composed of technical expertise and political components, in order to meet the requirements of objectivity and credibility for all. That compromise was meant to merge the elements of the two drafts before the Council, and to allow it to address the issue of conflicting information.

MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh) said Bangladesh was deeply concerned at reported human rights violations and the humanitarian situation in Darfur. If the information was true, then the situation was indeed serious. At the same time, one should be aware that there were other versions that were not reaching all. There appeared to be three types of conflicts in Darfur. First, was the age-old inter-tribal rivalry, which flared up form time to time? Recently, economic reasons had forced many tribes to covet the greener pastures in the South, leading to conflict. Those conflicts required attention from their internal dispute settlement processes. Second, there were conflicts between the central Government of Sudan and the movements. Following the Darfur Peace Agreement, many tribes were no longer in conflict with the Government, and expected to be paid compensation for some of their losses. The third type of conflict was one involving foreign State actors, along with cross-border forays. The international community should look not only at the issues in Darfur involving the government but also at the manufacturers and suppliers of weapons and ammunition to the non-state actors.

MOHAMMED HINDAWI (Jordan) said there was broad support that the situation in Darfur merited some attention from the Council. However, the Council would lose the right direction if its decisions were not based on proper information. This was the challenge for the Council at this stage - what was becoming increasingly obvious was that most of the information provided by one side about the situation in Darfur to the Council was contested by the other. A first-hand assessment by the members of the Council had become imperative.

In the light of the divergence in the characterisation of the situation, a high-level mission to the region should be dispatched to observe and assess the situation. The Sudanese Government should come through on its commitments to the Council and the international community, and at the same time the international community should encourage the full implementation of the Abuja Agreement, sending the right message to the non-signatories. Financial and technical support was essential for the successful implementation of the Agreement.

MURAD HAMAIMA (Libya) said there were parties external to the conflict that were involved in the conflict in Darfur, in particular, through supply of arms that were fuelling the conflict, and the fact-finding mission would have to look into that. All the peace agreements in which the Government of Sudan had participated had proven that the Sudanese Government was serious in its commitment to establishing peace. However, information received from the region was conflicting, and therefore Libya supported the sending of a fact-finding mission of the President and members of the bureau as well as the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Sudan.

SAMEH SHOUKRY (Egypt) said Egypt was deeply concerned with developments in Darfur whether as regards the ongoing conflict and its ramifications, both regionally and internationally, or as pertained to the human rights situation in the region. Egypt commended the Sudanese Government for the cooperation it has extended to international and regional human rights mechanisms, as well as its efforts to address conditions in the Darfur region, including through disarming the military, in spite of the serious practical challenges associated with the complex political and social situation. In that same vein, Egypt attached importance to the steps taken by the Government to implement the Darfur Peace Agreement, which aimed at reaching a comprehensive ceasefire, power and wealth sharing, final security arrangements and initiatives in the Darfur-Darfur dialogue.

Egypt strongly believed that if indeed the international community was genuinely interested in restoring peace and security in the region, it should extend the necessary and urgent financial and technical support to the Government of Sudan so as to enhance its capacity to provide the necessary humanitarian assistance to the inhabitants of Darfur. Egypt looked forward that the Council would assume its responsibilities in an equitable manner and demonstrate credibility by avoiding politicisation of issues and by implementation of its decisions.

LUIS VARELA QUIROS (Costa Rica) said the Council had been convened to determine concrete measures to resolve the situation in Darfur. There was concern among the international community at the alarming reports being received about the relentless human rights violations taking place in Darfur, from various actors, including non-governmental organizations, the Government of Sudan, and the international press. The High Commissioner, Louise Arbour, had drawn the Council’s attention to the grave human rights violations taking place, and had appealed for protection of the civilian population and support for the International Criminal Court and its efforts to ensure that criminals did not escape.

Given the gravity of the reports, it was now appropriate to despatch as soon as possible an independent fact-finding mission to assess the situation on the ground, propose concrete measures, and report back to the Council so that it could take further measures to protect the civilian population in Darfur. The time had come to act, and to move from words to deeds, and for the Council to show to the world that it was an effective tool for the protection of human rights, the primary task for which it had been created.

CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) said that the Darfur Peace Agreement, signed in Abuja in May, along with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, enjoyed the broad support of a number of countries as an important step forward in the right direction. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea appreciated the efforts made by the Government and people of Sudan to restore peace and stabilize the situation in Darfur. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea also believed that objectivity and impartiality should be strictly observed in resolving the situation there. It was deplorable that the situation in Darfur had been negatively exaggerated or distorted and that the attempts made by certain ill-minded forces to implant antagonism, distrust and confrontation among the parties to the conflict had continued unabated.

What was most important was that the international community respect and encourage the principle that African countries were the real masters in resolving their own problems. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had supported the proposals and initiatives of the African countries aimed at a fair solution to all the problems facing the region, including the problem of Darfur.

SIRI TELLIER, of United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), said the armed conflict in Darfur was having unprecedented and negative effects on women and young girls. Incidents of rape were continuing with insufficient services available to respond to those and other emergency health needs, such as obstetric complications. The current programme of UNFPA in Darfur, working in close collaboration with sister agencies and other partners, was focused on preventing sexual and gender-based violence and providing support to survivors, and reducing maternal mortality and morbidity by addressing people’s reproductive rights through the provision of quality reproductive health information and services and community mobilization.

PAUL KAVANAGH (Ireland) said the special session of the Human Rights Council to address the human rights disaster in Darfur was long overdue. Once again, and over several years, African civilians had been subjected to torture, pillage and enforced displacement, killed in huge numbers, women and girls persistently made the victims of sexual violence, and aid and humanitarian workers were increasingly targeted for attack. The fundamental seriousness of what had been happening in Darfur had not been exaggerated, as some had suggested. Nor was the underlying situation improving - on the contrary, it was getting worse.

The origins of the conflict in Darfur were complex, and no rational person would believe that a resolution would be easily reached or implemented. However, what had been happening in Darfur was a disgrace - and the whole of Africa knew it, as did decent people the world over. There should be an immediate end to the ongoing violations of international humanitarian and human rights law in and around Darfur. The Government had a responsibility to protect its citizens from violence and to guarantee respect for human rights. An urgent assessment mission should be dispatched, with a composition that was knowledgeable, credible, objective and independent.

SEJDI QERIMAJ (Albania) said that Albania was most concerned by the human rights violations in Darfur, the murders, the forced displacement of civilians, the rapes, and the attacks against foreign troops and the staff of international organizations. According to credible information from different sources, that was what was taking place in Darfur today.

For three years now, they had all been witness to the fact that Darfur was a theatre for the violation of the most fundamental human rights, including the right to life. Albania was aware of how complex the overall situation in Darfur was, and was also conscious of the efforts undertaken by the Sudanese Government to resolve those problems through the political process, in conformity with the conclusion of the high-level consultations on the Darfur crisis. Albania was convinced that what was needed was a sincere collaboration on the part of all interested parties and the goodwill for the faithful implementation of the decisions of the Human Rights Council in favour of the victims of human rights violations whose eyes were turned to the Council today.

ELISABET BORSIIN BONNIER (Sweden) said that not a day went by without information of widespread, gross and systematic violations of international human rights and humanitarian law in Darfur, including forced displacement on a massive scale; looting and destruction of villages; killing of civilians, including children; abduction of women, rape and sexual violence; and enforced disappearances, torture and inhuman and degrading treatment. These heinous crimes took place in a climate of impunity. All parties to the conflict bore a heavy responsibility for the situation, but the Government of Sudan had the overriding responsibility to protect its citizens and to facilitate for international humanitarian organizations to bring life-saving protection and assistance to the victims. All parties to the conflict must join and implement the Darfur Peace Agreement and all attacks against civilians must stop.

KHADIJA RACHIDA MASRI (African Union) said since the beginning of the conflict in Darfur, the African Union had deployed considerable efforts to bring an end to the conflict and improve the difficult conditions of the people of Darfur. More energetic efforts and concrete support were required from the international community to bring an end to this situation which was so prejudicial to the people of Darfur, neighbouring countries, and the whole continent. There should be increased coordination between the United Nations and the African Union.

The African Union had made constant efforts to enhance implementation of the Abuja Agreement and to call upon all parties involved to put an end to hostilities and acts of violence, and implement the cease-fire. All delegations were thanked for highlighting the achievements in the field, and it was hoped the credibility of the Union would be a guarantee for all to work together for peace and stability in Darfur, and work for a consensus resolution to come from the Council.

AHMED MOHAMED MASOUD AL RIYAMI (Oman) said the grave humanitarian situation in Darfur made it incumbent upon everyone to participate in the search for appropriate solutions to assist the affected population and find peace. Oman supported the Abuja Peace Agreement and called on those who had not yet done so to sign it. Oman welcomed the efforts of the Sudanese Government to put an end to the conflict in Darfur, and hoped that the Human Rights Council would undertake all efforts to mobilize the international community to assist in putting an end to the suffering there.

GEBRAN SOUFAN (Lebanon) said that Africa needed further attention through dialogue in order to resolve human rights problems. Resolutions aimed at resolving problems should be a result of dialogue and cooperation without politicization and selectivity. The President of the Council should lead the proposed assessment mission to Sudan. The Government of Sudan had made tremendous work in order to find a solution to the problem.

AHMAT ABDOULAYE OGOUM (Chad) said this was a welcome special session, as the situation in Darfur threatened the stability of Chad, as well as the whole sub-region. The session attested to the seriousness of the massive human rights violations in the region. Since 2003, Darfur had seen systematic and massive human rights violations, including torture, mass displacement, rape, and other forms of sexual violence. Almost 2 million had been driven from their homes. These systematic attacks on human rights were the symptoms of a humanitarian disaster, and were beginning to be seen in Chad, and attacks over the border by the Janjaweed came under international laws on conflict.

The Government could not be held responsible for the grave violations of international humanitarian law that were being committed in Chad by the Janjaweed, who had begun to attack villages repeatedly, until villagers had been killed or driven away. Villages were then looted. The consequence had been mass displacement by the population. These attacks were not just for material benefit, but to break down the resistance of the population and drive them away for good. A grave human rights crisis was occurring in the eastern parts of Chad, and this was intrinsically linked to the situation in Sudan.

EVERETT RESSLER, of United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), said that the situation in Darfur for women and children was worsening. The efforts of some 13,000 humanitarian workers had held the line against the threat of malnutrition, disease outbreaks and growing displacement of civilian populations. It was increasingly difficult for humanitarian actors to access vulnerable populations. Since May 2006, UNICEF had received reports of 23 incidences in which non-governmental organizations had been forced to withdraw staff from Darfur owing to growing insecurity. The non-governmental organizations were not alone: in July, three staff from the State Water Corporation in West Darfur – UNICEF’s main partner in providing clean water and sanitation facilities to all communities – were killed while working in a camp for displaced persons. Nine State Water Corporation staff had been abducted in October, and five were still missing.

Despite the Darfur Peace Agreement containing detailed provisions for protections of children’s rights, children were being killed, maimed and abused even as they spoke. The international community, the Government of Sudan, and all those currently involved in the conflict in Darfur, had the collective responsibility to stop the needless misery faced by millions of women and children. It was imperative that a speedy political resolution to this crisis was found before more lives were lost.

KHALIT BITAR (Syria) said Syria trusted the ability of the Government of Sudan to settle peacefully the problem in Darfur. In the past, the Government had been able to resolve the problems it faced with the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA). Foreign Governments should not intervene in the affairs of Sudan, which was fully capable of finding solutions to the problem in Darfur by itself. Any assessment mission or any other form of mission should be sent with the full consent of the Government of Sudan.

SILVANO TOMASI (Holy See) said for three years already, the Holy See had been following with grave concern the terrible suffering of the people caught up in the tragic conflicts intermittently erupting in Darfur. The situation on the ground, as a variety of official and private first-hand witnesses indicated, showed horrific violations of human rights. The Council had now taken up the plight of the people of Darfur, and aimed to find ways for the protection of their basic human rights. There was a convergence of good will that augured well for the Council’s expected role as an effective third pillar of the United Nations system. The urgent task was stopping the violence, the destruction and the impunity.

A moment of hope had been given by the Darfur Peace Agreement, and by the commitment of the international community to assist in its implementation. On these positive steps it remained possible to join forces and to initiate a process of pacification and reconciliation. The conflict was a major humanitarian challenge of huge proportions, but also an opportunity to address in a new collaborative way endemic problems, so as to create a future of hope for Sudan and for the entire African continent beyond regional and international interests.

ANTON PINTER (Slovakia) said Slovakia had welcomed the signing of the Darfur Peace Agreement in Abuja on 5 May this year. Unfortunately, seven months had elapsed since that agreement was signed and they were not in a position to say that the situation had improved. On the contrary, according to credible and reliable information the situation had even deteriorated. Moreover, in the meantime, the crisis had spilled over to Chad and the Central African Republic. Slovakia was particularly concerned about the fact that the violations of human rights and international humanitarian law were often directed against the most vulnerable groups, including women, children and the elderly.

Slovakia attached particularly importance to the issue of impunity. The findings of the report of the United Nations International Commission of Inquiry, released in January 2005, were still alarming. According to that report, the war crimes and crimes against humanity that had been committed in Darfur for which there was sufficient evidence “may be no less serious and heinous than genocide”. Slovakia thus expressed its full support to the International Criminal Court in its ongoing investigation of grave crimes committed in Darfur referred to it by Security Council resolution 1593 (2005).

GERHARD J.W. PUTMAN-CRAMER, of Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), delivering a statement on behalf of JAN EGELAND, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, said that less than three weeks ago, upon completing his fourth and last visit to Darfur, Jan Egeland had warned the Security Council that the next weeks could make or break their lifeline to more than 3 million people. Since that visit, events on the ground had deteriorated even further. This past weekend, heavily armed militia had attacked a civilian convoy near Sirba in West Darfur, looted relief supplies, and massacred some 30 civilians travelling with the convoy. More villages had been attacked and destroyed, forcing a total of more than 50,000 people to flee their homes in the last six weeks. And while aid workers were increasingly being attacked physically, the Government had not even agreed to extend the moratorium on restrictions on life saving work beyond the end of January 2007.

The trends they were seeing now were truly alarming, Mr. Egeland’s statement said, and they were spreading to Chad and the Central African Republic: more violence against civilians, more forced displacement, and dramatically less access to those most in need of relief. Without access for relief workers and without protection from militias intent on massacring civilians, several hundred thousand lives would be at risk within a matter of weeks, not months. What was needed now was urgent action to ensure that the world did not miss what might be the final opportunity to reverse the trends that were pushing Darfur and the region towards disaster. The Human Rights Council had a crucial role to play in maximizing the pressure on all sides, and should see this special session as an important early test of its credibility and effectiveness.

JUAN ANTONIO MARCH (Spain) said deep concern was felt for the developments in Darfur - it was one of the gravest situations in the world today, and the Human Rights Council should demonstrate to the civilian population, to the international community, and to the United Nations itself that it was ready to respond. The principle value of this session was to allow the Council to consider, debate and exchange information on the situation in Darfur, taking into account the prospects and immediate needs of the victims, above all, and to achieve agreement on an effective mechanism for follow-up.

The Council should support practical measures - its credibility was at stake in the eyes of those awaiting tangible results. It should exercise prudence and a sense of authority. The Sudanese authorities should meet the challenge set by the Council today, and to obtain this objective, the empowerment of the Government of Sudan and the collaboration of all parties would be essential. The special sessions of the Council were of added value, a positive change from the Commission, as it was now possible to focus on those who were truly suffering.

JEAN FEYDER (Luxembourg) said that for three years now the tragedy in Darfur had affected the civilian population and the stories of hundreds of villages destroyed, brutal treatment and torture of civilians, including in neighbouring countries, were reported every day. Daily hundreds of civilians, particularly women and children, were subjected to rape and sexual violation used as a weapon of war. The Sudanese Government had the responsibility of ensuring adequate protection for its civilian population. The reinforcement of international troops seemed essential to put an end to the harsh treatment of civilians.

Luxembourg noted with alarm that attacks against humanitarian workers – whether from the United Nations or non-governmental organizations – were repeated continually in Darfur. The question of impunity had to be dealt with seriously. The Government of Sudan was duty-bound to allow for an independent and impartial judicial process for the victims of human rights violations. The cooperation of the Government of Sudan was essential in any attempt to better the situation in Darfur, and therefore Luxembourg called on it to cooperate fully with the follow-up mechanism to be established by the special session.

FARAG BIN GHANEMN (Yemen) said that the special session would be a landmark if it dealt with the issue of Darfur impartially and without politicisation. The Abuja Peace Agreement had been the basis for peaceful negotiations among the various factions and the Government of Sudan, and its implementation was vital. The international community should continue to provide its humanitarian assistance to the region and continue its cooperation with the Government of Sudan. Yemen was of the view that the members of the Bureau of the Council should constitute themselves an assessment mission to Sudan.

ERIKA FELLER, of UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), said displacement as a result of inter-tribal fighting, armed nomad attacks, Sudan Liberation Army or militia activities, or Government of Sudan and rebel clashes now numbered some 1.9 million people, with 700,000 in West Darfur alone. The challenges facing protection and assistance delivery on the ground had increased over recent months, negatively impacting both the number of persons who could be reached, and the quality of support provided. Security, or rather the lack thereof, continued to be the overriding protection issue in Darfur. The hoped-for improvements flowing from the May 2006 Darfur Peace Agreement had yet to materialise, and hence were of little present consequence to the citizens of Darfur.

With the passing of the days, the sharpness of focus on the human consequences was blurring. The people of Darfur were paying a huge price in terms of shattered families, seriously abused women, traumatised children, and destroyed livelihoods. The Council should reach agreement on how to alleviate the human rights and humanitarian consequences of the conflict in Darfur. The Government should resolutely fulfil its responsibilities to provide the kind of stability and security its nationals urgently required, and humanitarian workers depended upon to do their job. All sides should recognise the neutrality and non-political nature of humanitarian work.

PASQUALE D’AVINO (Italy) said that Italy was deeply worried about the worsening security, humanitarian and human rights situation in Darfur. In the past weeks hundreds of civilians had lost their lives, while continuous violations of human rights were reported in vast areas of Darfur. Attacks against relief workers further aggravated the situation of the most vulnerable. There should be no impunity for those violations.

Italy was encouraged by the prompt response that the Council had given to the strong appeal of the Secretary-General at the beginning of the Council’s third session to address the situation in Darfur. The convening of the special session had been supported by a wide, cross-regional group of countries. That was an important result in itself as it was a proof of the willingness of the international community to put an end to the human sufferings in Darfur, and should be taken as a model for the future of the Council – a future based on dialogue, cooperation and shared values.

ZOHRAB MNATSAKANIAN (Armenia) said the convening of this special session testified to the presence of serious concern of the international community with respect to the ongoing human rights and humanitarian situation in Darfur. That the humanitarian and human rights problems persisted in the region was beyond doubt. Armenia recognized the need to firmly place the acts on behalf of the Council on sufficient information and clarity of the understanding of the situation on the ground. Armenia would welcome the emergence of a consensus on the issue of dispatching an assessment mission to Darfur.

CARLOS PEREIRA MARQUES (Portugal) said in spite of the efforts of the international community and the African Union, the grave security and humanitarian crisis that had been going on in Darfur for the last three years continued to deteriorate. Confronted with such an emergency situation, it was the duty of the international community to act - it had already had to say “never again” too many times. All parties should end the hostilities and join and implement the Peace Agreement. By finally convening the session on what was certainly one of the gravest human rights emergencies in the world today, the Council demonstrated that it could be up to the expectations and hopes raised by its creation.

The facts and the dimension of the crisis were established and well documented in official reports of the United Nations and the African Union. The added-value of the expert assessment mission to Darfur was to evaluate the human rights consequences of the crisis, and to propose recommendations to put an end to all ongoing human rights law and humanitarian law violations and to guarantee that the perpetrators of such violations would be brought to justice in a timely and effective manner.

CAROLINE MILLAR (Australia) said that the conflict in Darfur had cost the lives of an estimated 200,000 people, while a further 2 million had been displaced from their homes. According to United Nations and other authoritative sources, violence against civilians, mainly women and children, continued to increase. That situation required a collective sense of urgency from the international community. The special session provided the world with an opportunity for meaningful action with broad-based support. Effective follow-up had to be reflected in the outcomes of the special session.

The future reputation of the Council would be determined, to a significant degree, by the credibility of this special session and the clarity and effectiveness of its outcomes. An urgent assessment mission with human rights expertise should therefore be dispatched to assess the situation in Darfur on the ground. The mission should be composed of independent experts who were able to make an accurate and impartial assessment. For their part, Australia had provided 52.6 million Australian dollars in humanitarian assistance to Sudan since May 2004, and had contributed personnel to the United Nations Mission in Sudan. Since mid-2003, Australia had also made available more than 15,000 humanitarian visas to the Sudanese people.

TONIS NIRK (Estonia) said Estonia was deeply worried about the grievous humanitarian situation in Darfur and about violations of human rights and humanitarian law in Sudan. The crisis had affected al the people in the region. More than 70 per cent of the population in Darfur did not have access to elementary food, and the perpetrators of human rights violations were not prosecuted and punished and they operated in a climate of impunity. Estonia considered it crucial that an assessment mission of competent and independent experts, including relevant thematic Special Procedures of the Council, should urgently visit the region. They should present an assessment on their respective fields of responsibility and make recommendations that should urgently be implemented.

JUAN MARTABIT (Chile) said that the Council was duty-bound to address the human rights situation in Darfur. If evidence was needed for the urgent need for the session, it would be the stark description given by the High Commissioner for Human Rights earlier, and the impact of the violence on the civilian population as described by the United Nations Secretary-General. The Government of Sudan and the allied militias continued to be responsible for gross violations of human rights and humanitarian law. The genuine information provided by the United Nations Secretary-General and the High Commissioner left no doubt as to the gravity of the human rights violations being committed and the suffering of the involved communities.

It was essential that the Council urgently dispatch a mission to assess the human rights situation in Darfur, to report to the Council at its fourth session. The mission should be made up of Experts. Note was taken of the cooperation of the Khartoum Government with the Special Rapporteur. Given the urgent situation, the Council should respond urgently, or its credibility would be seriously affected.

ALIREZA MOAIYERI (Iran) said that Iran commended the Government of Sudan for the ongoing affirmative initiatives that it had taken in implementing the Darfur Peace Agreement as the basis for the peace process in the region. Iran was further encouraged by the recent positive developments as reflected in the statement issued by the third meeting of the Darfur Peace Agreement Joint Commission on improvement of the security situation in most parts of Darfur.

Iran believed that the African Union had an important role vis-à-vis containing the situation. The realization of that role would serve to reaffirm the capabilities of African States in resolving issues affecting the continent. In that regard, Iran called upon the Council to adopt the African Group’s proposals.

WARREN W. TICHENOR (United States) said the United States was appalled by the violence in Darfur and welcomed the special session on the situation in Darfur. It was important to make clear that the international community respected human life. The United States reiterated its strong concern for the dire humanitarian situation on the ground in Darfur, brought on by continued violence by all parties and exacerbated by continued lack of humanitarian access in some areas. The United States would continue to help relieve suffering and to save lives. The United States called on the Government of Sudan, and all armed groups, including those rebel groups that had not signed the Darfur Peace Agreement, to refrain from violence and to pursue a peaceful solution to the crisis. Pending the restoration of peace and security, the Government of Sudan should shoulder its responsibility to protect all individuals against human rights violations, especially against the use of rape as a weapon against the women of Darfur, and the recruitment of child soldiers.

ANDREJ LOGAR (Slovenia) said the reports about the abysmal situation of the population in the Darfur region were numerous, and there was much viable information available through the United Nations and its agencies. While the efforts of the Sudanese Government to engage in a series of agreements were recognised, more was needed- the Government should fulfil its primary obligation to protect all of its civilians against all forms of violence, and should ensure that none of the evil perpetrated went unpunished.

Among many other concerns for the human rights situation of the civilian population in Darfur, that of children was among the most preoccupying, as appalling violence against children would have long-term consequences, perpetuating violence in the generations that would follow. The Council was facing a crucial test. Each and every one of the Member States would be judged on whether they had done their share by upholding “the highest standards in the protection and promotion of human rights”. They should put aside the political, regional, religious or cultural sympathies, and ensure that the situation of the civilian population of Darfur was accorded the objective and independent assessment of their situation that had been given by the Council to other situations.

ORSOLYA TOTH (Hungary) said that Hungary subscribed to the observation of the Secretary-General that the Council would only be able to fulfil its vocation if its members were willing and able to build coalitions based on principle, and on a determination to uphold human rights worldwide. Hungary had followed with deep concern the appalling security, humanitarian and human rights situation in Darfur and was convinced of the need to put an immediate end to the ongoing violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. The Government of Sudan had a dual responsibility: not to participate in such actions and to protect people from such attacks. Addressing the issue of impunity was equally crucial in order to ensure redress for victims and thus allow for a lasting peace settlement.

Hungary was of the opinion that the international community already had a significant amount of reliable and credible information at its disposal about the human rights situation in Darfur. The reports of the Secretary-General and of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, as well as those of the Special Rapporteur, Sima Samar, contained ample firsthand information. The African Union, through the African Union Mission in Sudan operation, had also been active on the ground and reported regularly. For that reason, Hungary believed that in order to bring added value, the Council should build on those already existing efforts and through dispatching an assessment mission should aim at identifying the best ways to assist the Government of Sudan in implementing the recommendations aimed at alleviating the grave human rights situation in Darfur.

MARIE LOUISE OVERVAD (Denmark) said it was of great importance that all recognized the urgency that the issue required. The humanitarian crisis was not just steadily deteriorating in Darfur, it was in a free fall. And now it was also spreading to eastern Chad and northern Central African Republic. The international community was witnessing a man-made disaster of horrendous magnitude. Already hundreds of thousands had lost their lives. Millions continued to be displaced. Rape and indiscriminate killings were some of the horrific weapons in that deepening conflict. In the last six weeks alone, another 50,000 civilians were forced to flee their homes in Darfur. The civilian population of Darfur had suffered long enough. The tragedy that had been unfolding in full view to the world the last couple of years should be brought to an end. As a member of the Security Council, Denmark had consistently supported that all measures be put to use as and when appropriate.

FRANCISCOS VERROS (Greece) said the special session was proof that the Council could respond to crisis situations touching human rights and humanitarian rights. It was also proof that delegations could, when the situation required, pass beyond geographical groupings and act according to objective criteria. The Darfur tragedy was recognised by the international community as having the characteristics of a humanitarian crisis. It was obvious that the meeting of the Council responded to an objective need, not a selective one.

Impunity for those who were guilty of these crimes was inconceivable. Priority should be given to halting atrocities and safeguarding the innocent. The organisation of a special mission to Darfur was imposed by the current situation. It was vital to act.

WEGGER STROMMEN (Norway) said that Norway particularly welcomed that the special session on Darfur was taking place as a result of a joint effort with broad support, including from the African Group and the concerned country, Sudan. In the last few days, humanitarian workers had been evacuated and relocated from different places in Darfur as a result of violence and direct attacks. Norway called on the Government of Sudan to assume its responsibility to protect the lives of its citizens, and on all parties to ensure unimpeded humanitarian access to all those in need in Darfur.

Only a credible political process could provide sustainable solutions to the crisis in Darfur. Norway supported the conclusions from the African Union/United Nations Summit in Addis Ababa on 16 November, including the measures to re-energize the political process based on the Darfur Peace Agreement framework and to establish a strengthened ceasefire. Norway further welcomed the three-phased plan for support to the African Union Mission in Sudan, as well as the decisions to extend the mission’s mandate for six months. Norway supported the urgent dispatch of an independent assessment mission to Darfur. It did not, however, support the notion that regular reporting by the African Union Mission in Sudan, the UN Secretary-General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights were not credible and accurate. The main focus of the mission should therefore not be fact-finding, but to assess the human rights situation and protection needs, and to provide recommendations thereon to the Council.

ITZHAK LEVANON (Israel) said that today, the enlightened world should thank those who called for the special session for bringing to the world’s conscience the plight of millions of displaced, hundreds of thousands of slaughtered, women raped and children killed. One was witnessing the questionable behaviour of certain States of the Council, claiming that the facts and figures were disputed. What had happened should be clarified before action would be taken. The atrocities were well documented and there was no need for further testimony. The Government of Sudan preached the rhetoric of peace, but promoted the reality of obstruction. The Sudanese Government operated under a policy of denial, neglect and the blaming of others, seemingly impervious to the realities on the ground as documented by every other credible observer. The tragedy in Darfur was a wake-up call and a reminder as well. In these days, the remembrance of the horrors of the Holocaust was being mocked by disgraceful initiatives such as the Holocaust denial conference currently underway in Iran. Would there be a conference 60 years from now denying the fact that hundreds of thousands of innocents perished in Darfur?

MOHAMMAD ABU-KOASH (Palestine) said there were alarming paradoxes being witnessed at this special session. The Secretary-General had chosen to deliver a televised message, and failed to address it at the previous special sessions on Palestine and Lebanon. Second, there were new talents of eloquence and advocacy manifested by the High Commissioner in her statement on Darfur. Palestine wondered why the High Commissioner had not issued any single report on the ubiquitous Israeli violations of human rights in Palestine, when there were so many on Darfur.

Third, it was amusing to see Israel co-sponsoring the draft resolution on the situation. Israel supported the dispatching of an urgent mission to Darfur headed by the Special Rapporteur, while it had obstructed the mission of the Special Rapporteur on Palestine, and blocked the Commission on the Israeli massacre in Beit Hanoun. The efforts of the Government of Sudan and the African Union were commended, and the Council and the international community should assist the Government in its efforts to spread peace and tranquillity in Darfur. The resolution adopted by the Council should not reflect the concerns of a single group, but endorse the concerns of the African Group, which was the primary concerned group.

AMY LAURENSON (New Zealand) said that, for the human rights situation in Darfur to improve, there had to be an improvement in the security environment. The safety of agencies providing humanitarian access had to be guaranteed in all areas, and those violating humanitarian law by attacking civilians and humanitarian relief workers had to be held accountable. Impunity must not be tolerated.

New Zealand continued to believe that, in the present circumstances, the deployment of a United Nations mission had the best chance of protecting, promoting and monitoring the human rights situation in Darfur and of guaranteeing the safety of humanitarian workers and civilians under threat of physical violence. For those reasons, New Zealand fully supported United Nations Security Council resolutions 1679 and 1706. New Zealand called once again upon the Government of Sudan to accept the need for an enhanced United Nations presence in Darfur and the authority of a mission as the best means to protect civilians, ensure safe and unhindered delivery of humanitarian aid, and to re-establish law and order. The Council had to identify concrete and effective contributions it could make to efforts already under way in Darfur. New Zealand strongly supported the dispatch of an independent assessment mission to Darfur as the concrete first step.

ALEX VAN MEEUWEN (Belgium) said that according to credible sources, at least three million people in Darfur needed urgent humanitarian assistance and protection. The first responsibility in protecting the civilian population against human rights violations should be assumed by the Government of Sudan. The Government, in view of putting an end to the spiral of violence, should get rid of impunity and ensure that all those responsible for human rights violations were prosecuted. The Government should also implement the Security Council resolution pertaining to Darfur and cooperate with the International Criminal Court, and guarantee the proper functioning of its national justice system. Only measures against impunity at all levels could allow the prevention of human rights violations and ensure the protection of the civilian population in Darfur.

ALICIA MARTIN (Nicaragua) said the special session should take place in an atmosphere of non-selectivity, non-politicisation and impartiality, which would contribute to the credibility of the Council. It was urgently necessary to halt the conflict in Darfur, and stop it from spreading insecurity to other countries of the region. The efforts of the Government of Sudan were recognised. Without lasting peace, there could be no support for fundamental freedoms and human rights.

Sudan should receive assistance and commitment from the international community in order to achieve peace. The Council should find consensus-based measures, providing a response to the humanitarian crisis and the needs of the victims. There should be a special mission which could assess independently and impartially the situation, so that the Council could ensure effective follow-up. The international community should continue in the spirit of solidarity and cooperation.

ISABEL FROMMELT (Liechtenstein) said that cooperation was the key word when it came to putting an immediate end to the ongoing violations of human rights and humanitarian law in Darfur. The Government of Sudan had a primary obligation to protect all civilians, in particular women and children, against all forms of violence. While Liechtenstein deeply deplored that all parties to the conflict had not signed the Darfur Peace Agreement, that should not be invoked as a justification for the lack of swift and effective action by the Government to protect the civilian population. Combating the prevailing culture of impunity and bringing the perpetrators and instigators of grave human rights violations to justice was vital for the prevention of the further deterioration of the situation. That would require the full cooperation o the Government with the Human Rights Council, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the International Criminal Court.

Liechtenstein fully supported the idea of sending an expert mission to Darfur, headed by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan. Only an independent expert mission could ensure an impartial assessment of the human rights situation which was firmly rooted in the understanding that universal human rights standards had to apply to all Member States of the United Nations regardless of their size and political influence.


Right of Reply

FOROUZANDEH VADIATI (Iran), in a right of reply, said it was ironic that the representative of Israeli regime and occupying power was trying to mislead the attention of the Council from the agenda under discussion. The Teheran conference was not about the denial of Holocaust, it was rather an academic one that would examine all aspects of the issue. Further, as the delegation of Palestine reminded the Council, there had been an Israeli Holocaust against Palestinian people on a daily basis for more than 60 years.

For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC06090E