HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL CONCLUDES GENERAL DEBATE ON HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATIONS THAT REQUIRE ITS ATTENTION

The Human Rights Council this afternoon concluded its general debate on human rights situations that require its attention.

Delegations and non-governmental organizations spoke about violations of human rights in a number of countries and territories.

Speaking this afternoon were the delegations of Australia, New Zealand, United States, Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, African Union, Democratic Republic of the Congo and Lesotho.

Also speaking were representatives of the following non-governmental organizations: International Federation of Human Rights Leagues (FIDH), Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples, Asian Legal Resource Centre, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, Commission of the Churches on International Affairs of the World Council of Churches, speaking on behalf of Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development; and Asian Legal Resource Centre, Interfaith International, International Association of Schools of Social Work, speaking on behalf of International Federation of Social Workers, International Commission of Jurists, United Nations Watch, Baha'i International Community, International League for the Rights and Liberation of peoples, Human Rights Watch, Union de l'action féminine, International Islamic Federation of Student Organizations, International Human Rights Association of American Minorities, International Human Rights Association of American Minorities, World Muslim Congress, Indian Council of South America, Conectas Direitos Humanos, World Federation of Democratic Youth, International Union of Socialist Youth, Amnesty International, International Movement against all Forms of Discrimination and Racism, Colombian Commission of Jurists, African-American Society for Humanitarian Aid and Development, France Libertés – Fondation Danielle Mitterrand, World Peace Council, Nippon Foundation, Arab Organization for Human Rights and Union of Arab Jurists.

Speaking in right of reply were Iran, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Sudan, Uzbekistan, Cuba, India, Belarus, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, China, Colombia, Philippines, Iraq, Japan, Morocco, Tanzania and Canada.

The next meeting of the Council will be at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 25 September, when it will review the mandate of Louis Joinet, the Independent Expert appointed by the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights in Haiti, as part of its review, rationalization and improvement of mandates process.

Documents Before the Council

Under the agenda item on human rights situations that require the Council’s attention, the Council has before it a note verbale (A/HRC/6/G/5) from the Permanent Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic, which contains a letter from the Permanent Representative of the Syrian Arab Republic addressed to His Excellency Ambassador Doru Romulus Costea, President of the Council, expressing the Syrian Government’s concern regarding the worrying and alarming deterioration in the health of a Syrian citizen from the occupied Golan Heights, Bishr Al-Maqt, who has been held in Israeli occupation jails for 22 years and is currently in Al-Jalabou Prison.

There is also a letter (A/HRC/6/G/1) from the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations Office at Geneva, which contains the document “on the situation in Estonia”. This document refers to “the disquieting situation in Estonia, and the profound crisis stemming from the policy of integration in Estonian society pursued by the Estonian authorities in recent years.” According to the letter, a “large-scale propaganda campaign of blatant lies and disinformation is being conducted, aimed at justifying the actions of the Estonian leadership, the search for guilty parties and efforts to repair the country’s sullied reputation. All available methods are being used to persecute the leaders of the Russian diaspora, local human rights defenders and journalists from the Russian-language media. A veritable witch-hunt is unfolding.”

There is also a note verbale (A/HRC/6/G/8) from the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Armenia to the United Nations Office at Geneva which contains the following documents: Resolution of the European Parliament on cultural heritage in Azerbaijan, dated 16 February 2006; Memorandum by a group of European parliamentarians submitted to the United Nations Economic, Scientific and Cultural Organization on the destruction of the archaeological complex in Jugha and of the entire Armenian cultural heritage in the Autonomous Republic of Nakhijevan (Azerbaijan); and Introductory note concerning the chronology of annihilation of the archaeological complex in Jugha.


General Debate on Human Rights Situations that Require the Council’s Attention

CAROLINE MILLAR (Australia) said the Council should focus on the full range of pressing human rights concerns around the world and take decisive action. There was concern for the severe threat to human rights in Darfur, and the Group of Experts should produce strong recommendations on the situation. Australia was concerned about the lack of democratic values and due process in Zimbabwe, where there was appalling economic mismanagement, which had imperilled the security of ordinary Zimbabweans’ livelihood. In Fiji, intimidation of opponents and critics of the military continued.

In Burma, international human rights standards should be applicable to all citizens, and the Government should respect its citizens’ right to freedom of expression. There was concern for the situation in Iran, in particular with regard to the application of the death penalty, and discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities, including the Baha’is.

DON MACJAY (New Zealand) said New Zealand valued the cooperative engagement of those involved in tackling human rights situations. It hoped the Human Rights Council could be used constructively in support of Governments. Myanmar remained a serious situation and the international community should, in the words of the Secretary General’s Special Envoy, “step up its efforts to find solutions to the challenges faced by the country”. Those detained after recent protests, and political prisoners in general, should be released. New Zealand looked forward to dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar next March. The situation in Darfur also remained serious and New Zealand hoped the UN/African Mission in Sudan would help create a more secure environment. New Zealand also called for efforts to improve the situation in Zimbabwe, where the human rights situation was deteriorating.

WARREN W. TICHENOR (United States) said that there were many pressing urgent and current human rights situations that required the Council’s attention but which unfortunately and inexplicably were not receiving it. Disturbing attacks on well-established human rights principles were continuing in attempts of some Governments to intimidate and suppress human rights defenders. Unjust laws had been wielded as political weapons against those with independent views. The international community had a responsibility to speak out to defend human rights. From Cuba to “North Korea” to Uzbekistan, those who sought their right to freedom of expression faced unrelenting reprisals. In Iran the harassment and imprisonment continued. The Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe continued its crackdown on civil society. The Sudanese Government continued to harass humanitarian personnel in Darfur. Burma’s extremely poor human rights record continued to worsen. In Belarus, human rights activists and opposition politicians continued to be targets of repression. Serious concerns were expressed regarding the human rights restrictions on non-governmental organizations and the media, notably in China and Russia. The Council was becoming less and less relevant because it continued to ignore the many pressing country situations. Action was strongly urged.

HANS GRUN (Denmark) said there was utmost concern about the continued use by the Zimbabwean authorities of arbitrary arrests, torture, intimidation and violence. The Government should focus on resolving Zimbabwe’s grave political, economic, social and humanitarian problems in a dialogue with all the country’s political forces, and to the benefit of the long-suffering population. The detrimental effects of the crisis in Zimbabwe for the region were enormous.

The humanitarian crisis in Darfur was amongst the most serious of our time. Some 240,000 people had been displaced this year alone, and every day the lives of families and children were destroyed. The abuses had no limit: rape and sexual slavery were used as weapons. The recent positive events gave reason to hope that a peaceful Darfur was in reach: the international community should hold the Government of Sudan and the rebel movements to their promises. The Government had the responsibility to protect its people; the rebel movements should adhere to basic human rights principles.

CHRISTOFFER BERG (Sweden) said there was now a wide range of instruments to tackle human rights situations around the world and make sure expectations in the Council were not disappointed. The Universal Periodic Review would be a valuable tool for ongoing scrutiny of violations, but the Council should not shy away from using other means in cases of suddenly emerging human rights violations. Country mandates were of vital importance and the Council must be ready to adopt new country mandates as the need arose. Special sessions were a crucial means of reacting to urgent situations, as shown by the session on Darfur last December. Sweden hoped future special sessions would be equally results-oriented. These and other settings for addressing problematic country situations should be part of the Council’s forward view.

BART OUVRY (Belgium) said that the Council should also take a look at noticeable progress. The recent decision by Gabon and Rwanda to abolish the death penalty was good news. Still, worrying situations persisted like the human rights violations taking place in Myanmar. There were signs of an approaching destabilisation in that country. Belgium condemned human rights violations in Myanmar and demanded the release of political prisoners. No country could claim to be perfect in the protection of human rights and every UN Member State should cooperate with the Council. Refusal do so was inadmissible. Regarding the situation in Sudan, the deployment of the peace force would be a great contribution.

USMAN SARKI (African Union) said the Group of Experts on Darfur was thanked for the interim report. It was significant to note that the Government of Sudan had endeavoured to comprehensively implement recommendations in accordance with benchmarks set by the Experts. This process should be continued to ensure sustained implementation of all relevant recommendations that would eventually address the various human rights issues in the region. The effort toward peace in Darfur was now gaining a new impetus and momentum. This Council could assist by calling upon all sides in the conflict to come to the negotiation table and spare the people of Darfur further suffering and hardship.

SEBASTIEN MUTOMB MUJING (Democratic Republic of the Congo) said item 4 of the agenda should be seen as a positive thing and should avoid becoming a tool for settling of accounts between States or a means of interfering in internal affairs of States. The Council should attend to real human rights needs and Member States should refrain from reciting the same cases over and over again. Systematic demonization was unproductive. Knowing that the country was undergoing a difficult moment economically and socially, countries of the Southern African Development Community had tried to help Zimbabwe to find ways out of its current crisis. Among the steps taken were the initiative to bring the Government and opposition together to negotiate ways forward. It was in no-one’s interest to add fuel to the fire. Dialogue and assistance should be the priority.

LELOHANG MOQHALI (Lesotho) agreed that the economic situation in Zimbabwe had deteriorated drastically and that the people were facing unacceptable hardships. But the cause was not the buying of farms by the Government. The economic sanctions and embargo against Zimbabwe were also causing the hardship. The opposition party had shown its wish to help the people. Nothing should be done to endanger the emerging spirit of national reconciliation.

SIMIA AHMADI, of International Federation for Human Rights Leagues, said in Zimbabwe, the Government had not implemented any of the African Union and United Nations recommendations for a national dialogue and reconciliation. In Myanmar, the military regime had justified the arrest of university students and members of the Myanmar Development Committee, as a way to prevent instability in Burma. With regard to Iran, harsh repression had increased over the last months. In Belarus, freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression were seriously restricted by the implementation of recent laws. In Darfur, the Government continued to carry out indiscriminate attacks, killings leading to further displacement of the civilian population.

GIANFRANCO FATTORINI, of Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples, said the Council had not paid due attention to the matter of self-determination for the people of the Western Sahara. Human rights defenders faced difficulties, with restricted freedoms of association and assembly. The High Commissioner’s information mission of 2006 had said that the violations of human rights there stemmed from the non-application of the right to self-determination. The Council should accompany the process of negotiation scheduled to take place in December, particularly regarding the right to self-determination.

BASEER NAWEED, of Asian Legal Resource Centre, said that the situation in Pakistan was not gaining the attention it deserved in the Council. The media was being silenced and human rights defenders faced grave reprisals. The whereabouts of at least 5,000 people remained unknown. President Musharraf had confessed to the handing over of 600 persons to the United States for detention in Guantanamo Bay. Torture was extremely brutal and impunity ruled. The Council had to act to bring an end to mass disappearances.

JEREMIE SMITH, of Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, said unfortunately, the Government of Sudan, instead of taking real measures to improve the human rights situation on the ground in Darfur, continued to play political and rhetorical games with the Council and the international community. The Government had implemented almost none of the Group of Experts human rights recommendations, long- and short-term. In fact, widespread and grave human rights abuses still continued to be carried out in Darfur by Government forces, Government-supported militias, and rebel groups. The Council and the international community should stop playing rhetorical games with the Government of Sudan.

MARIE HILAO-ENRIQUEZ, of Commission of the Churches on International Affairs of the World Council of Churches, speaking on behalf of Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development; and Asian Legal Resource Centre, said extrajudicial executions in the Philippines continued and technical support and expertise might partly resolve the crisis but would not address the underlying causes, namely vilification of groups on the left as “front organizations” for armed anti-democratic groups, and aspects of the Government’s counter insurgency strategy, which facilitated extrajudicial killing. The Council should prevail on the Philippines Government to fulfill its pledges made to the General Assembly this year.

SANDAR ALI-KASHMIRI, of Interfaith International, said that the international community was quite unaware of the serious human rights violations in Pakistan and Pakistani-occupied Kashmir. The lack of freedom of expression and media controlled by Pakistan’s military-intelligence establishment ensured that the suffering of these helpless people continued far away from the glare of the media and international attention. Orchestrated referendums and rigged elections were routine practices in military-ruled Pakistan. Even the higher judiciary in Pakistan was not immune to attacks from the military leadership.

JOSEPH WRONKA, of International Association of Schools of Social Work, speaking on behalf of International Federation of Social Workers, said extreme poverty was an urgent world matter which affected all and required forceful intervention. There should be further consideration of extreme poverty as a violation of fundamental human rights and dignity. The Council should consider further debate on the Draft Guiding Principles on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights. Further, educational systems should incorporate human rights into their curricular from primary to professional levels.

LUKAS MACHON, of International Commission of Jurists, said the situation in Sri Lanka had deteriorated. Renewed violations by security forces and serious abuses by the LTTE demanded insistent condemnation. The Human Rights Council should pressurize the Government of Sri Lanka to agree to establish a human rights presence. In Myanmar, detentions showed that democratization was not seriously under way, and the Council should urge the Government to begin an inclusive progress towards democracy and allow monitoring by the Secretary-General’s Envoy. Attacks on human rights defenders in Zimbabwe and Colombia also required the Council’s attention. The renditions policy used under the United States’ counter-terrorism strategy, including “disappearances” and degrading treatment, demanded pressure from the Council and a coordinated plan to end overseas counter-terrorism detentions.

HILLEL NEUER, of United Nations Watch, said as urgent human rights situations had to be addressed, one was standing out: Iran. The nuclear programme was a threat to peace. The Iranian leaders were speaking about human dignity. But their own people’s rights were not being honoured. Discrimination should end in Iran. Its racism was shown through its holocaust denial. By organizing this conference, Iran had legitimised the revisionism. Iran’s President incited holocaust by his desire to wipe out Israel from the map. No one had so often called for genocide of Jews since Hitler.

BANI DUGAL, of Baha’i International Community, said Egypt’s new system for national identity cards did not allow its Baha’i citizens to obtain the new ID card. This was a grave violation of human rights, as Government policies had created a situation where members of a minority were denied official identity. Egyptian Baha’is were being denied recognition of their existence, which was turning them not only into non-citizens in their own country, but also into non-persons.

VERENA GRAF, of International League for the Rights and Liberation of peoples, said the killings, torture and forced disappearances in the Philippines were not justified under anti-terror strategies. The armed forces of the Philippines included junior officers who had committed atrocities under the Marcos regime. The army continued to serve as an instrument of repression, with guidance and support from the United States and its anti-terrorism agencies. The Permanent Peoples Tribunal, that held public hearings in The Hague in 2007, had unequivocal evidence of the military’s role in human rights violations in the Philippines, yet this evidence had been confiscated by the Netherlands Government.

JULIE DE RIVERO, of Human Rights Watch, said that in Burma mass demonstrations were a sign of the country’s profound human rights crisis. The Council should seize the opportunity presented by the events unfolding in Burma. A special session to discuss the urgent measures needed to prevent further violations should be convened. The Human Rights Council should be able to engage on varied situations in different ways. The Council should look at situations where current events raised opportunities for opening dialogues on human rights issues, for example the Olympics in China. The Council should look at the use of the death penalty in Iran, the Iraq war crisis and where Special Procedures had reported on substantial abuses.

SAADANI MAOULAININE, of Union de l'action féminine, said with regards to the human rights situation in the Tinduf camps, this was very serious, and the Council should give it special attention, as it was one of the most long-lasting conflicts around. There were daily violations of the rights of women, children and older people in the camps; families were disintegrating, and women were deprived of their most fundamental human rights. There was no freedom of expression, and no democracy. A just and peaceful solution should be found to put an end to the suffering of this innocent and defenceless population who were the real victims of the conflict.

SHAMIN SHAWL, of International Islamic Federation of Students Organizations, said atrocities committed by Indian Security Forces in Kashmir were well documented. Yet no concrete measures had been taken by the international community to address this ongoing tragedy. India shunned all efforts to address the issue. Thousands of Kashmiris had been killed or imprisoned without recourse to justice. Years of impunity for serious abuses had produced a vicious cycle of violence and a climate of fear and distrust. The Council was urged to listen to the plight of the poor Kashmiri people in the Indian-occupied zone.

UZEZA SHAH, of International Human Rights Association of American Minorities, said that one region where aggression continued was Indian-occupied Kashmir. India had continued the use of brute force to suppress the indigenous Kashmiri movement. Taking advantage of the war on terrorism, India drew supposed linkages with international terrorism. Security laws were used to facilitate coercive measures. Forced disappearances were a common phenomenon. The Council was urged to take due notice of the violations in Kashmir.

USMAN KHAN, of World Muslim Congress, said two generations of Kashmiri people had been denied justice, their human rights trampled as they voiced their demand for the implementation of their right to self-determination. The fundamental rights of the Kashmiri people were being suppressed under a number of draconian laws. Impunity was the rule, not the exception, for the Indian occupation forces in the Indian-occupied Kashmir. The international community should not turn a deaf ear to the violations being committed, and should demand that India stop the violence. There should also be a repeal of the draconian laws. The Council should focus attention on the situation of human rights in Indian-occupied Kashmir.

RONALD BARNES, of Indian Council of South America, said a diplomatic protest was being launched against the United States for illegal occupation of Alaska. The United States made the white population and the military the de jure citizens in the vote to annex Alaska. The United States denied there had been racial discrimination even though the Supreme Court declared that the land was for the white race. The Human Rights Council should address the racial discrimination issue in this case.

TAFADZWA MUGABE, of Conectas Direitos Humanos, said that it was regrettable that the Zimbabwean Government refused to collaborate with the Special Procedures. The Council should undertake urgent attention and action. It should revive efforts to send its Representatives, Rapporteurs and Experts to Zimbabwe. If the Government continued to refuse to cooperate, a special session should be convened.

MOHAMED MAYARA, of World Federation of Democratic Youth, said at a time when the promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms was expanding, the situation of human rights remained critical in Western Sahara, where the persistent practices of torture and penal over-crowding were deplorable. Hundreds of political prisoners were kept in arbitrary solitary confinement. Their detention had never been recognised by the Moroccan authorities, and it was thought that many of the disappeared were kept in secret facilities by the authorities, who wished to forbid all associative or political activity.

HMAD HAMMAD, of International Union of Socialist Youth, said the situation in Western Sahara required the attention of the Human Rights Council. The situation had worsened since May 2005, with increased repression, arbitrary detention, summary executions, intimidation and false accusations. Human rights defenders had been targeted. Impunity in the case of the Moroccan invasion remained an issue. International observers were still not allowed into the area by Morocco. The Council should put pressure on Morocco over all detentions, disappearances, and restrictions of access and communication, and should support the full exercise of the Sahraoui right to self-determination.

PETER SPLINTER, of Amnesty International, said that many situations around the world required and demanded the Council’s attention without further delay. The undermining of human rights by the so-called war on terror should also be addressed. Real security could only be achieved with the respect of human rights. Forced disappearances, arbitrary detentions and secret prisons were flagrant violations. The deteriorating conditions in Sri Lanka were also of concern. The Government’s denial of the gravity of the situation did not help the improvement of the situation.

NIMALKA FERNANDO, of International Movement against all Forms of Discrimination and Racism, said the Human Rights Council should pay special attention to Sri Lanka, a country engaged in a long and protracted war. It was a country seeking huge amounts for the development of its eastern region after virtually destroying the entire infrastructure and displacing its citizens in order to join Mr. Bush’s global war against terrorism. Sri Lanka had been under emergency regulation most of the time since 1971, giving rise to a culture of impunity among the police force. The Human Rights Council should be aware of the plight of human rights and humanitarian concerns in Sri Lanka.

GUSTAVO GALLON, of Colombian Commission of Jurists, said the Colombian Commission of Jurists was concerned about the disappearances, murders, arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture and cease-fire violations and other abuses carried out by State and paramilitary groups in Colombia. The Government should adopt a timetable for implementing the recommendations of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, including setting up a national Human Rights Plan and a legal framework for guaranteeing justice and reparations. It should develop a system of human rights statistics and protection of human rights defenders.

YUSUF ALTEYBE, of African-American Society for Humanitarian Aid and Development, said that they were grateful for the assistance and support provided by the Council for the situation in Sudan. All parties were encouraged to find a solution. Rehabilitation programmes should be speeded up. Financial assistance by the international community should be met, as this was a security for the rebuilding process. The international community should engage the civil society and not side step it in the region. The continuation of the crisis would put a hold in the process of development and the return of displaced persons.

DAHHA RAHOUMI, of France Libertés – Fondation Danielle Mitterrand, said the Council should take action to protect and promote human rights in Western Sahara, which was a dramatic situation affecting people who had suffered for 32 years already from ongoing systematic human rights violations that had affected every segment of the population. There was restriction of the freedom of movement and economic and cultural rights, including the right to work. Many people suffered from arbitrary detention, and torture and ill-treatment of prisoners were still flagrant. The Council should call for the immediate liberation of disappeared persons.

MUNAWAR LAGHARI, of World Peace Council, said there was serious suffering in Sindh and Balochistan, where military rule and the infringement of rights had been largely hidden from the outside world. Enforced disappearances were taking place, and there were illegal detentions in military-run camps. Relatives had little recourse to justice.

P. K. GOPAL, of Nippon Foundation, said that since the development of an effective cure for leprosy, some 15 million people worldwide had been cured of the disease. Only four countries remained where this was still a health problem and medication was available free to all in those countries. It was no longer a right to health issue but an issue of discrimination and poverty. Persons cured of leprosy were marginalized by society. Their access to employment was limited. A diagnosis of leprosy could lead to divorce. This issue should now be taken up by the Human Rights Council.

MOHAMED M. FAYEK, of Arab Organization for Human Rights, said there was concern for the situation in Darfur, especially violence against women and refugees and the escalation of the problem. This went along with the deterioration of human rights in Sudan as a whole, as evidenced by the increase in arbitrary detentions. The Darfur matter could only be settled through a comprehensive political settlement in Sudan, with an end to impunity. There should also be an end to the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, as the international community was failing to find a solution to the inhuman embargo against Gaza, which had led to an escalation of the problems in that area. With regards to the deterioration of human rights in Iraq, after six years of international war against terrorism, there was growing concern to put an end to international conflict and make peace and justice reign.

ELIAS KHOURI, of Union of Arab Jurists, said the situation in Iraq had become a tragedy of serious concern to many organizations, yet the Council had not given the matter due attention. Among the violations, hundreds of thousands of civilians killed, tortured and humiliated in detention facilities, deterioration of health and education systems, deteriorating child health, over five million internally displaced persons, etc. The Council should act to protect the right to life in Iraq, designating a Special Rapporteur to tackle the situation of human rights in the country.


Right of Reply

ALIREZA MOYERI (Iran), speaking in a right of reply with regards to the false accusations concerning the situation of human rights in Iran, said that the Government of Iran was fully committed to the protection of freedoms of all persons at all levels. It had extended its full cooperation to all UN bodies. What was witnessed in the Council today was the continued politicization of the Human Rights Council. The Member States of the Council should not allow those who derailed the Commission to derail the Council. Those who tortured innocent people and were running secret detention centres in the war on terror and who invaded foreign countries should not be allowed to teach to others the value of human rights.

CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic People's Republic of Korea), speaking in a right of reply, said the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea categorically rejected the allegations by Japan, the United States, and the European Union. The former should reflect on its geonocidal activities during the Second World War, and should settle these crimes before anything else. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea had settled all its obligations towards Japan. The United States remained an obstacle to the enjoyment of all Koreans of their human rights, dividing the country and imposing an embargo. The European Union deserved the same reproaches, and represented confrontation that was incompatible with genuine dialogue and cooperation. Other allegations made by such countries as the United Kingdom, Canada and France were rejected. The ever-growing tendency of naming and shaming for political reasons would precipitate the Council into the same situation as the Commission.

RAHMA SALIH ELOBIED (Sudan), speaking in a right of reply, said, regarding Ahmed Haroun, the accusations concerning his appointment were without foundation. He had not been nominated to a committee to investigate human rights violations in Darfur or any human rights body but to a political committee dealing with political negotiations within the Sudanese Government.

BADRIDDIN OBIDOV (Uzbekistan), speaking in a right of reply, said that since its independence, Uzbekistan had worked towards reforming the State into a democratic country. The Constitution enshrined human rights. Parliament had adopted several laws on human rights. Allegations concerning the alarming human rights situation in Uzbekistan were rejected. The Canadian and United States delegations should look at their own human rights situations.

JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba), speaking in a right of reply, said that during the meeting this morning, Cuba had set out lines which it thought should guide the agenda, warning the usual extremists that they could be digging the Council’s grave if they continued with the warped practice of “blaming and shaming” . Cuba would not react to provocation - it was strong, convinced it was right, and would continue to attain a different, operational Council, in which respect and mutual dialogue prevailed. Cuba therefore extended a helping handkerchief to dry their tears to those who today bewailed the resounding flop of their pointless anti-Cuban manoeuvre in the service of Washington - particularly Sweden, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Cuba was advocating dialogue and cooperation, but still knew how to fight battles. There would be no impunity. If toadying to Washington was to bring down the Council, then all should know that there was no way back to the discredited methods of the past Commission for the countries of the South.

MUNU MAHAWAR (India), speaking in a right of reply, said Jammu and Kashmir was an integral part of India. India reiterated its statement of September 17 2007: bilateral matters should not be raised in multilateral fora, and Pakistan should not permit territory under its control to support any form of terrorism.

ANDREI MOLCHAN (Belarus), speaking in a right of reply, said the Council should focus on the principles of human rights, which were universality and impartiality. Certain countries could not refrain from old practices. Some delegations seemed to have planned for confrontation. Constructive dialogue had nothing to do with what happened today. The Council had at its disposal the required tools to look at every situation around the world. The Universal Periodic Review needed to move away from such debates.

MARGHOOB SALEEM BUTT (Pakistan), speaking in a right of reply, said with regards to the statement made by India in right of reply, the agenda item under discussion was “situation of human rights which required the attention of the Human Rights Council”, and there was sufficient empirical evidence to attest that the situation of human rights in Indian-occupied Kashmir required the attention of the Council. There were custodial disappearances, deaths and harassments, along with torture, death, and arbitrary detention of ordinary Kashmiris. The real terrorism, which was brutal and cruel, was faced by Kashmiris due to Indian atrocities, sparked by their desire for self-determination and the full attainment of human rights. Since 1989, more than 89,000 civilians had lost their lives due to atrocities of the Indian security forces and thousands of women had been molested. These violations should be addressed by the Human Rights Council, as it was the most appropriate forum, as it valued consideration for human rights over any other. Human rights violations continued unabated in Indian-occupied Kashmir.

ALEXEY GOLTYAEV (Russian Federation), speaking in a right of reply, said Russia was surprised by the delegate of the United States, who gave no hint as to the human rights situation in the United States itself, the situation in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, forced renditions, Blackwater, and so on. The Human Rights Council should not be used for political purposes. States should show a responsible attitude. What kind of attitude was it that lay behind the United States’ withholding of support for the main human rights body and the withdrawal of funding for it?

RAJIVA WIJESINHA (Sri Lanka), speaking in a right of reply, said that Sri Lanka was grateful for the assistance given to improve the situation in the country. But the task was made much more difficult by the current melodrama. Irresponsible non-governmental organizations were ignoring some of the facts and were tampering data to give a wrong picture. This made the possibility of improving the situation more difficult.

ZHAO XING (China), speaking in a right to reply, said the statement by the United States delegate had accused China of restricting activities of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The Chinese Government valued the role of NGOs, and took a positive stance on their activities - several thousand NGOs were providing a range of services in China, including fighting poverty, and had played a positive role in promoting China’s economic and social development. The United States was only concerned about certain NGOs in certain fields of activities. The United States should render more support and assistance to NGOs which focused on fighting war, eliminating poverty, and supporting the rights of indigenous peoples.

CLEMENCIA FORERO UCROS (Colombia), speaking in a right of reply, said Colombia had always respected international agreements and been open to cooperation. It was strengthening its legal and civil institutions and welcomed the High Commissioner’s Office in the country. The aim was to have a frank and open dialogue with the High Commissioner over the Office and over human rights and freedoms in Colombia. Colombia should not have been mentioned under this agenda item. Colombia was working constructively on the promotion and protection of human rights, and was cooperating with international partners and non-governmental organizations.

ERLINDA F. BASILIO (Philippines), speaking in a right of reply, said that the wheel was moving forward in the Philippines. Firm steps had been taken. Alleged political killings were being investigated. Special courts had been created. Task forces of human rights prosecutors had been put in place. Cooperation between police and prosecutors was taking place. More steps against violence were being taken. The measures were starting to bear fruit.

OMER BERZINJI (Iraq), speaking in a right of reply, said with regards to the accusation made by a non-governmental organization accusing the Government of inciting confessional hatred, this was the contrary situation, the Government was trying to calm down things by promoting reconciliation, but militiamen and terrorists were the ones behind these ethnic killings. There was indeed a crisis. The Government was doing its best to put an end to this difficult situation, and all parties should stand by it against the enemies of freedom and democracy. If those who had killed during the dictatorship did not deserve a fair trial, then who did, the speaker asked. Execution was the sentence for pre-meditated murder, and this was a law in Iraq since 1959, although the Government hoped that it would one day be able to halt these executions. A saying in Iraq said God help Iraq from its own friends.

ICHIRO FUJISAKI (Japan), speaking in a right of reply, and responding to the earlier statement by the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea, said the allegations were totally unsubstantiated. Japan was ready to normalize relations with the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea in accordance with the Pyongyang Declaration. Resolution of the abductions issue was most important. Matters of concern should be discussed in a sincere manner.

MOHAMMED LOULICHKI (Morocco), speaking in a right of reply, said that a distortion of the reality in Morocco had taken place today in the Council. If all those allegations had been true, how could these people have come to Geneva? They had left their country and could go back to it. This proved that the freedom of movement and expression were guaranteed. How could the non-governmental organizations and the press visiting the region not have suffered from the alleged violations? There was an atmosphere of peace in the area. The international community had recognized the effective measures that had been taken in the country. The rights of Moroccan people were guaranteed.

BARAKA LUVANDA (Tanzania), speaking in a right of reply, said with regards to the statement made by the representative of Amnesty International, in which it said that Tanzania had actively participated in unlawful detainee transfers, secret detention, and others, he wished to point out that Tanzania was the seat of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and was committed to the cause of justice. Tanzania was governed by international agreements, as well as national laws. It had responded to such transfers under the umbrella of legislation that was in force, including bilateral agreements on extradition, under which contexts it only responded to such requests.

CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea), speaking in a second right of reply, said the facts and figures he had referred to earlier were historically documented, and the crimes committed by Japan in its occupation of Korea had yet to be settled. Discrimination was now directed towards Koreans in Japan. He urged Japan to unconditionally settle all past crimes and deal with those committed against Koreans living in Japan today.

TERRY CORMIER (Canada), speaking in a right of reply, said that Canada acknowledged the issues with which it struggled. It was not because Canada thought that they had it right all the way that it spoke about human rights issues. It was simply their responsibility as some of the UN members, dedicated to advancing and securing the rights of people. The citizens of all countries expected them to discuss human rights situation and to address them in the Council.

ICHIRO FUJISAKI (Japan), speaking in a second right to reply, said Japan understood the Council was created to discuss human rights issues in an amicable and sincere manner, to avoid name-calling as much as possible. The Council was here to solve issues - it was hoped the Democratic People's Republic of Korea would work to resolve its issues, including the abduction issue. Japan hoped it would not have to make such statements again.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC07065E