HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL EXTENDS MANDATES ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND FOREIGN DEBT, HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL SOLIDARITY AND MINORITY ISSUES
The Human Rights Council this morning decided to extend for three years the mandates of its Independent Experts on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights; on human rights and international solidarity; and on minority issues.
The Council also adopted texts on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism urging States, while countering terrorism, to fully comply with their obligations in respect of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in particular the absolute prohibition of torture; on the composition of the staff of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights; and on the enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights.
Of the six resolutions adopted this morning, three were adopted by a vote and three by consensus without a vote.
The resolution extending the mandate of the Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, in which the Council also decided to redefine the mandate of the special thematic procedure and rename it “Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights”, was adopted by a vote of 34 in favour, 13 against and no abstentions.
The resolution extending the mandate of the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity, in which the Council also requested the Independent Expert to continue work on the preparation of a draft declaration on the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity and to submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution to the Council, was adopted by a vote of 34 in favour, 13 against and no abstentions.
The resolution extending the mandate of the Independent Expert on minority issues for three years, which also requests the Independent Expert to promote the implementation of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, was adopted without a vote.
With regard to the other decisions taken this morning, the Council adopted the resolution on the composition of the staff of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights by a vote of 34 in favour, 10 against and 3 abstentions. Both the resolution on the enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights and the resolution on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism were adopted without a vote.
Speaking this morning in the debate on the resolutions were the delegates of Cuba, Sri Lanka, Slovenia on behalf of the European Union, Canada, Switzerland, the Republic of Korea, Austria, Mexico and the Russian Federation.
At the onset of the meeting, the Representative of Egypt called for a vote challenging the President’s ruling with regard to the consideration of amendments to draft texts and separate votes, per rule 130 of the Human Rights Council’s rules of procedures. Egypt said that it would challenge the ruling as it was of the view that the President could not interpret the rules of procedures. And if this interpretation was not challenged, then it would become a precedent. In a vote the members of the Council voted in favour of maintaining the President’s ruling by 26 in favour, 14 against, 4 abstentions, and three blank votes.
When the Human Rights Council resumes its work at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it will continue to take action on draft resolutions and decisions tabled during the current session. The Council will conclude its seventh regular meeting on Friday, 28 March.
Action on Resolution on Annual Report of High Commissioner for Human Rights and Reports by OHCHR and the Secretary-General
In a resolution (A/HRC/7/L.8/Rev.1) on the composition of the staff of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, adopted by a vote of 34 in favour, 10 against, and 3 abstentions, the Council requests future High Commissioners to continue enhancing the ongoing efforts in the fulfilment of the goal of a geographical balance in the composition of the staff of the Office; underlines the importance of continuing promoting geographical diversity in the recruitment of high-level and Professional posts, including senior managers; affirms the vital importance of geographical balance in the composition of the staff of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, taking into account the significance of national and regional specificities and various historic, cultural and religious backgrounds, as well as of different political, economic and legal systems, to the promotion and protection of the universality of human rights; recognizes the importance of the follow-up to and implementation of General Assembly resolution 61/159 of 19 December 2006 and underlines the priority importance that the Assembly continue providing support and guidance to the High Commissioner in the ongoing process of improvement of the geographical balance in the composition of the staff of the Office of the High Commissioner; requests the High Commissioner to submit a comprehensive and updated report to the Council in 2009 in accordance with its annual programme of work, following the structure and scope of her report and with a special focus on further measures taken to correct the imbalance in geographical composition of the staff of the Office.
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (34): Angola, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Uruguay and Zambia.
Against (10): Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia, Ukraine and United Kingdom.
Abstentions (3): Japan, Republic of Korea and Switzerland.
JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba), introducing draft L.8/Rev.1, said that Cuba wished to reiterate the importance of equitable representation. In adopting this resolution, the Council would be reaffirming the work needed to re-establish a balance in the staff of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. This would represent a positive step to representing the diverse historical and cultural particularities “Welcomes” should be replaced with “Takes note with interest”.
DAYAN JAYATILLAKE (Sri Lanka), speaking in a general comment, urged that the spirit of the initiative be recognised by all. It was not directed against the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) but it was intended at strengthening it and its independence. OHCHR should become a lighthouse of human rights. Sri Lanka supported the initiative to make the Office more representative of people and regions; making it a more accurate mirror of the planet. Only then would it be able to conduct its works effectively.
ANDREJ LOGAR (Slovenia), speaking on behalf of the European Union, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, recalled that according to Chapter 4 of the United Nations Charter, the General Assembly was the only body capable of addressing administrative and financial aspects of United Nations bodies. The report of the High Commissioner on the issue of staff of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights noted an improvement with the geographical distribution of staff in her Office, which was welcomed by the European Union. The European Union also supported the Secretary-General’s efforts to improve the composition of the staff along with the Secretariat. However, the European Union recognized that while co-sponsors of this initiative noted the work of the High Commissioner this did not change the concept of the draft resolution. The European Union would call for a vote on the draft resolution and would vote against it.
JESSICA BLITT (Canada), speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that Canada appreciated the efforts to establish a greater geographical balance within the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. However, Canada supported a central approach to human resources policy and not the piecemeal approach proposed in this draft resolution. Canada noted the General Assembly rules of procedure and stated that resolution 61/244 had already been established to address the geographical imbalances in the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. This draft therefore duplicated efforts already made by the United Nations in this regard. For these reasons, Canada would vote against this draft resolution.
NATALIE KOHLI (Switzerland), speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that in her report, the High Commissioner had stressed the new improvements made in the geographical representation of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Thus, the proposed resolution was seen as negative and it was not necessary to raise this issue every year. There was a risk that this would lead to micromanaging of OHCHR. Switzerland would thus abstain.
CHANG DONG-HEE (Republic of Korea), in an explanation of the vote after the vote, said the Republic of Korea was of the view that the staff composition of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights needed to be improved, but it was also concerned that the resolution might be interpreted that the Human Rights Council was trying to influence the affairs of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Therefore, the Republic of Korea abstained in the vote.
Action on Resolutions on the Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Including the Right to Development
Resolution on Enhancement of International Cooperation in the Field of Human Rights
In a resolution (A/HRC/7/L.5) on enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council urges all actors on the international scene to build an international order based on inclusion, justice, equality and equity, human dignity, mutual understanding and promotion of and respect for cultural diversity and universal human rights, and to reject all doctrines of exclusion based on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance; considers that international cooperation in the field of human rights should make an effective and practical contribution to the urgent task of preventing violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms; reaffirms that the promotion, protection and full realization of all human rights and fundamental freedoms should be guided by the principles of universality, non-selectivity, objectivity and transparency, in a manner consistent with the purposes and principles set out in the Charter; takes note of the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights; calls upon Member States, specialized agencies and intergovernmental organizations to continue to carry out a constructive dialogue and consultations for the enhancement of understanding and the promotion and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, and encourages non-governmental organizations to contribute actively to this endeavour; and requests the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to consult States and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations on ways and means to enhance international cooperation and dialogue in the United Nations human rights machinery, including the Human Rights Council, as recognized by the General Assembly in the preamble of its resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006, and to present a report to the Council at the relevant session in 2009.
RAFAEL GARCIA (Cuba), introducing the draft resolution, said that several Non-Aligned Movement countries co-sponsored this resolution and they were convinced that the strengthening of international cooperation in the field of human rights was important. This strengthening had to be based on the principle of genuine dialogue and cooperation. States had to respect their engagements. One of the fundamental objectives was to urge all international players to put in a place a system respecting cultural diversity and international human rights. International cooperation would help to promote human rights throughout the world.
Resolution on Mandate of Independent Expert on Effects of Foreign Debt on Human Rights
In a resolution (A/HRC/7/L.9) on the mandate of the Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights, adopted by a vote of 34 in favour, 13 against, and no abstentions, the Council decides to redefine the mandate of the special thematic procedure and rename it “Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights” so as to allow the mandate-holder to pay particular attention to: the effects of foreign debt and the policies adopted to address them on the full enjoyment of all human rights, in particular, economic, social and cultural rights in developing countries; the impact of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations on the capacity of States to design and implement their policies and programmes, including national budgets that respond to vital requirements for the promotion of the realization of social rights; measures taken by Governments, the private sector and international financial institutions to alleviate such effects in developing countries, especially the poorest and heavily indebted countries; new developments, actions and initiatives being taken by international financial institutions, other United Nations bodies and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations with respect to economic reform policies and human rights; quantification of minimum standards to support the realization of the Millennium Development Goals; enhancement of consultations with all relevant stakeholders in the fulfilment of this mandate. The Council also decides that the mandate of the Independent Expert will be extended for a period of three years; requests the Independent Expert to explore further, in his/her annual report to the Council the interlinkages with trade and other issues, including HIV/AIDS; also requests the Independent Expert to seek the views and suggestions of, inter alia, States and international organizations on the draft general guidelines, and to present updated draft general guidelines to the Council in 2010; and requests the Independent Expert to submit an analytical report on the implementation of the present resolution to the Council in 2009, and to submit a progress report on this issue to the General Assembly at its sixty-third session.
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (34):Angola, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Uruguay and Zambia.
Against (13):Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Romania, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine and United Kingdom.
Abstentions (0):
YURY GALA (Cuba), introducing draft resolution L.9, wished to reiterate the importance of this draft on the mandate of the Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights and hoped that it would be extended for an additional period of three years. The Council requested the Independent Expert to explore further, in his/her analytical annual report to the Human Rights Council, the inter-linkages with trade and other issues, including HIV/AIDS, when examining the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights. It also requested the Independent Expert to seek the views and suggestions of States, international organizations, United Nations agencies, funds and programmes, regional economic commissions, international and regional financial institutions and non-governmental organizations on the draft general guidelines with a view to improve them, as appropriate, and to present updated draft general guidelines to the Council in 2010. Finally, it hoped that this draft resolution would be adopted by the Council with the greatest support possible.
ANDREJ LOGAR (Slovenia), speaking on behalf of the European Union, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that the European Union was not against the issues raised in the resolution. But the European Union felt that they went beyond the mandate of the Human Rights Council and would fit better in other forums. There was a risk of duplication with other international organizations that were dealing with debt issues. The European Union thus called for a vote and would vote against the draft resolution.
DAYAN JAYATILLAKE (Sri Lanka), in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said Sri Lanka would support the text as it did not agree with the criticism that much of the substance belonged elsewhere. The Human Rights Council must not give up the responsibility to examine human rights in a holistic manner. This included discussing the roots and the context in which violations of human rights took place. The divide between economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights was also obvious. The text attempted to bridge this divide, which was vitally necessary to bring together the views between the North and South. Sri Lanka would vote in favour of the draft.
Resolution on the Mandate of the Independent Expert on Human Rights and International Solidarity
In a resolution (A/HRC/7/L.12) on the mandate of the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity, adopted by a vote of 34 in favour, 13 against, and no abstentions, the Council decides to extend the mandate of the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity for a period of three years to promote the realization of the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity through the further development of guidelines, standards, norms and principles enhancing the enjoyment of this fundamental right and the adoption of measures at the regional and international levels; to promote and consolidate international assistance to developing countries in their endeavours in development and the promotion of conditions that make the full realization of all human rights possible; to seek views and contributions from Governments, United Nations agencies, other relevant international and non-governmental organizations; to examine ways and means of overcoming existing and emerging obstacles to the realization of the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity; to make recommendations on possible steps with a view to attaining progressively the full realization of the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity; to work in close cooperation with all States and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, as well as with other relevant actors, to mainstream fully the effective realization of the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity in the activities of the United Nations; and to continue participating in and contributing to relevant international conferences and events with the aim of promoting the realization of the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity. The Council requests all States, United Nations agencies, other relevant international and non-governmental organizations to cooperate with the Independent Expert in his/her mandate; and requests the Independent Expert to continue work on the preparation of a draft declaration on the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity and to submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution to the Council.
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (34):Angola, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Uruguay and Zambia.
Against (13):Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Romania, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine and United Kingdom.
Abstentions (0):
RAFAEL GARCIA (Cuba), introducing the draft resolution, said that for years, the defunct Commission had adopted several resolutions on international solidarity. The mandate had started from the need to establish a new approach on solidarity between countries. The resolution called for an extension of the mandate for three years.
ANDREJ LOGAR (Slovenia), speaking on behalf of the European Union, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, called for a vote on L.12.
DAYAN JAYATILLAKE (Sri Lanka), speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said Sri Lanka would vote yes. Sri Lanka was of the view that the text by focusing on solidarity brought together the dimensions of equality and fraternity, equating it with the goal of liberty. Recalling the words of the late Pope John Paul II, Sri Lanka said there was a need for a globalization of solidarity.
Resolution on Mandate of Independent Expert on Minority Issues
In a resolution (A/HRC/7/L.17) on the mandate of the Independent Expert on minority issues, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to extend the mandate of the Independent Expert on minority issues for a period of three years and requests the Independent Expert to promote the implementation of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, including through consultations with Governments, taking into account existing international standards and national legislation concerning minorities; to identify best practices and possibilities for technical cooperation with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, at the request of Governments; to apply a gender perspective in his/her work; to cooperate closely, while avoiding duplication, with existing relevant United Nations bodies, mandates and mechanisms and with regional organizations; to take into account the views of non-governmental organizations on matters pertaining to the mandate; to guide the work of the Forum on Minority Issues, as decided by the Council in its resolution 6/15; and to submit annual reports on his/her activities to the Council, including recommendations for effective strategies for the better implementation of the rights of persons belonging to minorities. The Council calls upon all States to cooperate with the Independent Expert in the performance of the tasks and duties mandated to him/her, and encourages specialized agencies, regional organizations, national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations to develop regular dialogue and cooperation with the mandate-holder.
CHRISTINA KOKKINAKIS (Austria), introducing the draft resolution, said that since its establishment in 2005, the mandate had considerably contributed to the issue of minorities. It served at promoting awareness and social cohesion. The resolution was building on past successes and would extend the mandate for another three years. In conducting the assessment of the mandate, broad discussion between delegations had taken place. Austria was confident that the resolution would be adopted without a vote.
Resolution on Protection of Human Rights While Countering Terrorism
In a resolution (A/HRC/7/L.20) on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, adopted without a vote, the Council calls upon States not to resort to profiling based on stereotypes founded on grounds of discrimination prohibited by international law, including on racial, ethnic and/or religious grounds; urges States, while countering terrorism, to fully comply with their obligations in respect of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in particular the absolute prohibition of torture; also urges States to fully respect non-refoulement obligations under international refugee and human rights law and, at the same time, to review, with full respect for these obligations and other legal safeguards, the validity of a refugee status decision in an individual case if credible and relevant evidence comes to light that indicates that the person in question has committed any criminal acts, including terrorist acts, falling under the exclusion clauses under international refugee law; opposes any form of deprivation of liberty that amounts to placing a detained person outside of the protection of the law, and urges States to respect the safeguards concerning the liberty, security and dignity of the person and to treat all prisoners in all places of detention in accordance with international law; calls upon States to ensure that their laws criminalizing terrorist conduct and/or activities are accessible, formulated with precision, non-discriminatory, non-retroactive and in accordance with international law, including human rights law; calls upon States and other relevant actors to continue to implement the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, which reaffirms respect for human rights for all and the rule of law to be the fundamental basis of the fight against terrorism; takes note of the requests by the General Assembly to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism to continue to contribute to the work of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force; and requests the High Commissioner to report regularly on the implementation of the present resolution to the Council and to the General Assembly.
MABEL GOMEZ OLIVER (Mexico), introducing draft resolution L.20, said that some changes had been made to the draft. The resolution focused on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. Indeed, there were challenges associated with counter-terrorism measures and Mexico suggested the need for a Special Rapporteur on the protection of human rights while combating terrorism. Racial, ethnic, and religious rights must be respected, along with the absolute prevention of torture or inhuman and degrading treatment. Whilst combating terrorism was an element of vital concern for all States, it could not come at the expense of fundamental human rights. Lastly, paragraph 18 and 19 would be included as a footnote rather than in the body of the text. Mexico hoped that this text would be adopted without a vote.
SERGEY CHUMAREV (Russian Federation), speaking in a general comment, thanked all delegations that had participated in the lengthy consultations that had led to the current text. It was believed that one of the key aspects of this draft was the full condemnation of terrorism in all its forms. National steps in combating terrorism should be conducted in line with international obligations. States should take all legal and technical measures that they should deem necessary to counter terrorism. The continued cooperation with the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, the Special Rapporteur and other United Nations bodies was deemed important. The Russian Federation hoped that the resolution would be adopted without a vote.
For use of the information media; not an official record
HRC08041E