HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL ADOPTS OUTCOMES OF UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW PROCESS ON PERU, BENIN, SWITZERLAND AND REPUBLIC OF KOREA
The Human Rights Council this morning adopted the outcomes of the Universal Periodic Review process on the reports on Peru, Benin, Switzerland and the Republic of Korea.
José Eduardo Ponce Vivanco, Permanent Representative of Peru to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said that the first two rounds of the Universal Periodic Review had been found to have worked in a genuine way, and it was hoped that the process would further strengthen itself. Three of the recommendations contained in the outcome document on Peru had been found to be relevant to commitments already undertaken by the Peruvian Government, and thus had been accepted. With regard to recommendation 3 (on prohibition of the death penalty), that could not be implemented, even though there had not been a single execution in Peru in the past years. Concerning other commitments, it was recalled that the invitations extended to all Special Procedures mandates by Peru still continued to be valid. Peru would also provide the relevant human rights committees with Peru’s pending reports before the end of 2009. Concerning the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, one or several national preventive mechanisms would be established, so as to satisfy their international obligations in that regard.
In the discussion, Peru was asked to focus on the recommendations in the Working Group’s report that addressed the issue of violence against women, as in the context of domestic violence, the rights of women were not fully provided for and perpetrators were let off with light sentences. A speaker also stressed recommendations related to protecting the environment of indigenous people and their rights in the context of the extraction of resources from indigenous lands.
Speaking during the discussion were the representatives of the Latin American Committee for the Defence of Women’s Rights and the Comision Juridica para el Autodesarallo de los Pueblos Originarios Andinos (CAPAJ).
Thierry Alia, Director of Human Rights at the Ministry of Justice of Benin, noted that Benin had taken a number of measures to implement the recommendations contained in the Working Group’s report. Benin had hosted a visit from the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, and had provided access to places of detention in May 2008. Benin had accepted 33 out of the 34 recommendations contained in the report. With regard to homosexual relations between consenting adults, there were only marginal cases in Benin, and there were no court orders or punishments for such acts. With respect to executions, the last execution to take place in Benin had been over 16 years ago. Moreover, measures had also been stepped up to prevent acts of torture to combat those cases, including the establishment of national mechanisms to prevent torture and to draft legislation addressing such cases. Living conditions in prisons had also been addressed. The decision to accede to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities had been taken.
During the discussion, speakers said that the Benin’s commitment was shown by the fact that it had already begun adopting the recommendations, such as the law dealing with torture. Benin had demonstrated practical and strong commitment to constructively engage with the international system. Also international assistance should be provided to this country to help them implement the recommendations that had come out of the Universal Periodic Review.
Speaking during the discussion were the delegations of Morocco, Algeria, Senegal, Nigeria and Djibouti. The non-governmental organization Franciscans International also took the floor.
Paul Seger, Director of the International Law Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland, said that during the Universal Periodic Review ‘s interactive dialogue, 31 recommendations had been made. During the Working Group sessions, six of them had been agreed to and two had been refused. Of the 23 remaining recommendations, following further consultations at the federal level, 6 had been refused, a further 3 had been refused but amended to constitute voluntary commitments and 14 had been accepted. Most of the recommendations had thus been agreed to. On the recommendation asking for a specific law prohibiting religious hatred, it was noted that that offence was already covered in the Swiss Penal Code. Some 450 cases had already been dealt with on that issue since the entry into force of that Penal Code. One recommendation also asked Switzerland to ensure that couple of the same sex were protected from discrimination. It was noted that partnership registration was now possible in Switzerland. Same-sex couples were, however, not authorised to adopt children, or to have medical assisted birth. Turning to the voluntary commitments, Switzerland had started looking into the possibility to create a national human rights institution in-line with the Paris principles, but there was no final decision in that regard as yet.
During the discussion speakers welcomed Switzerland’s commitment to continue to ensure dialogue with civil society and with the Council. The decision to accede the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture was welcomed. Switzerland was also encouraged to continue to take measures with regard to migrant workers, as recommended in the report. It was also hoped that Switzerland would create a national human rights institution in keeping with the Paris principles
Speaking during the discussion were the delegations of Belgium, Qatar, Azerbaijan, the United Kingdom. The following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru; Amnesty International; Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions; Prison Fellowship International; and Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network.
Sung-Joo Lee, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said that, following the Universal Periodic Review process in May, the Government had accorded its thorough consideration to all the recommendations made by the Member States. As part of the effort to gain a clearer overall picture of the recommendations, an inter-ministerial meeting had been held. As a result, the Republic of Korea had accepted most of the recommendations made, in whole or in part. All recommendations related to women’s rights were accepted. The Government would also intensify efforts to protect the rights of foreign workers by upholding relevant laws. It would continue to exert efforts to protect the rights of disabled people, and it was pursuing domestic procedures for the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Recommendations advocating further ratification and accession of human rights treaties would be considered by the Government. Issues such as the death penalty, the National Security Law and conscientious objection to military service also required further study.
In the discussions, speakers echoed the Working Group’s recommendation that the Republic of Korea harmonize the right to freedom of association with international human rights standards. The Government was also called on to take measures to improve the implementation of the relevant legislation regarding migrant workers. The Government was strongly urged to follow the recommendation of the Universal Periodic Review Working Group and to abolish the national security law as soon as possible.
Speaking during the discussion were the delegations of Malaysia and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. The following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea; Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development; Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network; Amnesty International; and MINBYUN-Lawyers for a Democratic Society.
The Council will reconvene this afternoon at 3 p.m. when it is scheduled to consider the outcomes of the Universal Periodic Review process on the reports on Pakistan, Zambia, Japan and the Ukraine.
Consideration of Outcome of Universal Periodic Review for Report on Peru
JOSE EDUARDO PONCE VIVANCO, Permanent Representative of Peru to the United Nations Office at Geneva, reaffirmed Peru’s commitment to the universal system of human rights protection. Peru had supported the establishment of the Universal Periodic Review; it was a vital instrument to ensure that the Human Rights Council guaranteed equality of treatment to all countries. The first two rounds of the Universal Periodic Review had been found to have worked in a genuine way. It was hoped that the process would further strengthen itself. In particular, it was advisable to review how questions and recommendations were formulated, in order to avoid politicisation. They should focus, rather, on actions. That was a responsibility of all States, in order to help all countries to improve their human rights situation. Peru had carried out the Universal Periodic Review exercise always keeping in mind that the process was a way to strengthen the human rights situation in Peru.
With regard to the recommendations 4, 20 and 17 contained in the outcome document, those had been found to be relevant with the commitments already taken by the Peruvian Government, and thus had been accepted, said Mr. Ponce Vivanco. With regard to recommendation 3 (on prohibition of the death penalty), that could not be implemented, even though there had not been a single execution in Peru in the past years. Concerning other commitments, it was recalled that the invitations extended to all Special Procedures mandates by Peru still continued to be valid. They would also provide the relevant human rights committees with Peru’s pending reports before the end of 2009. Concerning the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, the Government expressed its full willingness to live up to its commitments; one or several national preventive mechanisms would be established, so as to satisfy their international obligations in that regard. A national human rights plan was also planned to be implemented. Peru was further ready to provide appropriate follow-up to the work carried out in the Council, through the National Human Rights Council and other national institutions. The Universal Periodic Review exercise would not come to an end today, after the dialogue in the Council. Peru wished to continue with the current exchange of ideas and they would listen carefully to any additional recommendations.
ALEJANDRA SARDA, of Latin American Committee for the Defence of Women's Rights (CLADEM), in a joint statement with Action Canada for Population and Development; Federation for Women and Family Planning; and International Women's Rights Action Watch - - Asia Pacific, welcomed the openness to dialogue with civil society that Peru had displayed during the Universal Periodic Review and Working Group process. Paragraph eight, recommendation number five, in the report addressed the issue of violence against women and Peru should focus on that work. Within the context of domestic violence, the members of the judiciary and justice system did not fully provide for the rights of women, forcing them to put up with situations, and letting perpetrators off with light sentences. A training programme should be developed for police and officials so that they could be better prepared to deal with such cases. The programmes and plans mentioned in paragraph 8 of the report should be implemented. From 2004 to 2007, 134 women had been murdered each year in Peru, and in many cases the murderer was the husband. Peru should carry out the recommendations as soon as possible to ensure the right to life of women is upheld.
JORGE TAFUR, of the Comision Juridica Para el Autodesarrollo de los Pueblos Originarios Andinos (CAPAJ), said it was important for the rights of indigenous peoples had Constitutional protection. It was also important to protect their environment and rights in the context of the extraction of resources from indigenous lands. Indigenous people deserved the right of consent on matters that affected them. Visits by special reporters should be carried out in transparent and open manner.
JOSE EDUARDO PONCE VIVANCO, Permanent Representative of Peru to the United Nations Office at Geneva, thanked speakers for their statements. On the issue raised about the human rights of women, his initial impression was that what they had heard was not only reasonable, but from his side, attention should be given to this. On indigenous people, it was recalled that Peru had taken a decisive part in the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. That had been quite natural, given the population of Peru. Consultations with indigenous communities were already highly valued. Not only the Peruvian Government but also the mining companies were fully aware that the development of mining had to be done in partnership with the communities living in the area.
Consideration of Outcome of Universal Periodic Review for Report on Benin
THIERRY ALIA, Director of Human Rights at the Ministry of Justice of Benin, in opening remarks, noted that Benin had taken a number of measures to implement the recommendations contained in the Working Group’s report. From 8 to 26 May 2008, Benin had hosted a visit from the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, and had provided access to places of detention. Benin was not stingy in its cooperation, and took all due diligence to support and assist the committee who came to conduct their assessment. Relevant State structures had also been implemented for the prevention of torture. Benin had accepted 33 out of the 34 recommendations contained in the report. Benin has welcomed cooperation with the mandate holders of the Human Rights Council and had officially invited the Special Rapporteurs to visit. The Government was committed to responding to urgent communications and measures needed in the country. With regard to homosexual relations between consenting adults, there were only marginal cases in Benin, and there were no court orders or punishments for such acts.
With respect to executions, the last execution to take place in Benin had been over 16 years ago, Mr. Alia continued. The Government of Benin had voted in New York in favour of the moratorium on the death penalty. Measures had also been stepped up to prevent acts of torture to combat those cases, including the establishment of national mechanisms to prevent torture and to draft legislation addressing such cases. Following its ratification of the Convention against Torture, the Government had begun without delay to draft a law that integrated the definition of torture contained in the Convention, as well as other principles contained therein.
Living conditions in prisons had also been addressed, Mr. Alia said, to bring up the level to the standards of the United Nations. The Government had started to work to reduce the numbers of detainees in the prisons and was also working to improve the quality of food and health care services available to detainees. Amnesty International’s report in May 2008 had denounced the conditions of detention in prisons; however, the aforementioned demonstrates Benin’s commitment to changing that situation. Benin was actively combating poverty, harmful practices to women and children, and promoting education for all. The decision to accede to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities had been taken. The recommendations in the report on the Universal Periodic Review were welcomed, and Benin would do its utmost in addressing them.
OMAR RABI (Morocco) congratulated Benin for its presentation, which had demonstrated the importance which Benin gave to human rights and to the Universal Periodic Review process. Morocco welcomed that Benin had accepted 33 of the 34 recommendations made by the Working Group. The Government’s commitment was also shown by the fact that Benin had already begun adopting the recommendations, such as the law dealing with torture. The Human Rights Council had to work to support Benin as it pursued democracy and a system of governance based on a rule of law.
LARBI DJACTA (Algeria) thanked Benin for their comprehensive presentation. Benin was commended for its commitments to protect human rights, despite the constraints it was facing because of limited resources. The spirit of dialogue shown throughout the process was appreciated. On the verge of adopting the final outcome, Algeria appealed the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights to provide Benin with help.
PIERRE DIOUF (Senegal) said that, on 7 May 2008, during the dialogue on Benin, the Working Group had stressed the promotion and work in the country on disabled persons and access to drinking water. Senegal had expressed then, and again now, its wish that the international community could back Benin in the area of human rights with technical assistance. The Senegalese Authorities were committed to improving the human rights situation by accepting and implementing the recommendations of the Working Group. That effort and commitment should be commended to encourage Benin’s actions to continue in ensuring human rights were fully realized in the country.
MOHAMMED I. HAIDARA (Nigeria) said Benin had demonstrated practical and strong commitment to constructively engage with the international system. That had been demonstrated by Benin’s adoption of the Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, of the Convention against Torture, and to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, as well as its ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Also welcome were the steps taken so far by the Nigerian Government to fully implement the recommendations emanating from the Review. Nigeria was optimistic that the international community would come to the assistance of Benin with in the context of follow-up to the Universal Periodic Review and in consolidating its achievements so far.
AHMED MOHAMED ABRO (Djibouti) congratulated the delegation of Benin for the very frank dialogue, as well as for its sincerity and lucidity in stressing the constraints that they were facing. Djibouti would like to have international assistance provided to this brotherly country to help them implement the recommendations that had come out of the Universal Periodic Review.
GOTZON ONANDIA, of Fransicans International, welcomed Benin’s frank dialogue and cooperation committed to in the Universal Periodic Review. The persistence of infanticide in the North of the country was of great concern. Benin should continue to work on the recommendations from the Committee on the Rights of Child, the Committee against Torture and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The efforts made thus far were noted. Nevertheless, health centres and birth facilities needed to be improved, giving women a safer environment to give birth, especially in the North of the country. The Government should also encourage women not to give birth at home, which would reduce the incidence of infant mortality. Benin was urged to take measures to address the recommendations made during the Universal Periodic Review.
THIERRY ALIA, Director of Human Rights at the Ministry of Justice of Benin, in final remarks, thanked those who had taken the floor for the observations they had made. Benin was committed to implementing the recommendations made here. It was specifically committed to the recommendations of Franciscans International: Benin had committed to ban all practices involved in sorcerer children. The Universal Periodic Review process was praised. The dialogue had been a fruitful one. Everyone wanted to ensure that the rights of all, including women and children were protected. It took the commitment to implement the recommendations made with the help of the Human Rights Council and Benin’s supporter countries. The Council was thanked for an edifying discussion.
Consideration of Outcome of Universal Periodic Review for Report on Switzerland
PAUL SEGER, Director of the International Law Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland, said that during the Universal Periodic Review ‘s interactive dialogue, 31 recommendations had been made. Eight of the recommendation had already been responded to during the Working Group sessions; six of them had been agreed to and two had been refused. Turning to the 23 remaining recommendations, those had been the object of further consultations at the federal level. Six of those had been refused, a further three had been refused but amended to constitute voluntary commitments and fourteen had been accepted. Most of the recommendations had thus been agreed to.
Mr. Seger then turned to the reasons why Switzerland could not agree to several recommendations. One recommendation called for adoption of legislative measures to ensure that human rights were taken into account further upstream in the judiciary to ensure their conformity with international standards. That would require substantial change to the actual procedures and would give the Federal Court competencies it currently did not have. There was thus no need to take additional steps in that direction at present. The Swiss Government in any event, was already carrying out measures to check that civil initiatives kept within the framework of international Law. On the recommendation asking for a specific law prohibiting religious hatred, that offence was already covered in the Swiss Penal Code. Some 450 cases had already been dealt with on that issue since the entry into force of that Penal Code. Switzerland did thus not believe that it was necessary to adopt an additional law in this area. With regard to the police, police forces in Switzerland were under cantonal and communal policies. Certain cantons allowed foreign nationals to apply, others did not. Thus, the recommendation asking for the police forces to allow minorities to apply and that a body be created to investigate police brutality was not possible because of the federal structure.
Mr. Seger also noted that the recommendation inviting Switzerland to withdraw its reservation on article 4 (on the ban on hate speech and racist organizations) the International Covenant on the Elimination of all forms of racial discrimination had been rejected. Despite continuous reservations on that article, Switzerland had, however, adopted an article on racial discrimination in its Penal Code. Regarding the recommendation on discrimination against persons on the basis of their sexual orientation, that did not pose any major problem to Switzerland, which had made combating discrimination one of its priorities. It had simply been rejected because it was only addressing sexual orientation. The recommendation also asked Switzerland to ensure that couple of the same sex were protected from discrimination. It was noted that partnership registration was now possible in Switzerland. Same-sex couples were, however, not authorised to adopt children, or to have medical assisted birth. Turning to the voluntary commitments, Switzerland had started looking into the possibility to create a national human rights institution in-line with the Paris principles, but there was no final decision in that regard as yet. On the Optional Protocol to International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Switzerland was already considering acceding to it. Switzerland did recognise the importance of giving to people the possibility of having recourse in case of human rights violations. Finally, Switzerland attached great importance to giving civil society the opportunity to express itself, and looked forward to their comments on this process.
BART OUVRY (Belgium) appreciated the response of Switzerland to questions concerning its immigration policy. Belgium was familiar with the immigration policy of Switzerland and understood that adjusting that legislation could not be done in a precipitous manner. Belgium particularly welcomed the declaration on the direct applicability of international human rights instruments, and that migrants could demand redress on the basis of those instruments before the courts. Switzerland’s commitment to continuing to ensure dialogue with civil society and with the Council was also welcome, and Belgium thanked Switzerland for the clarity of its replies and the added value of the statements today.
FAISAL ABDULLA AL-HENZAB (Qatar) congratulated Switzerland, which had cooperated with all mechanisms to promote all human rights. That was evident through Switzerland’s efforts in support of the creation of the Human Rights Council. Switzerland had also given a favourable reply to a number of the recommendations of the Working Group. Qatar welcomed Switzerland’s decision to accede the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture. Also noted were Switzerland’s commitment to combat racial discrimination and its decision to ratify the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. In addition, Switzerland was thinking about creating a national human rights institution in keeping with the Paris principles. Qatar called on the Swiss Government to continue its efforts of promoting human rights.
HABIB MIKAYILLI (Azerbaijan) congratulated Switzerland for its constructive approach. The fact that Switzerland had been represented by its head of foreign affairs during the Working Group sessions had shown how much importance Switzerland attached to the process. Switzerland was a country that could be seen as a model and its efforts to promote fundamental freedoms were applauded. It was also the birthplace of the ideas of Henry Dunand (the founder of the Red Cross). Switzerland was encouraged to continue to take measures with regard to migrant workers. It was also hoped that Switzerland would create a national human rights institution in keeping with the Paris principles.
MELANIE HOPKINS (United Kingdom) congratulated Switzerland for their constructive and considered approach to the Universal Periodic Review process. The Swiss review was further evidence that the Universal Periodic Review offered each and every country the opportunity for an honest, detailed and self-critical assessment of its own human rights record. Switzerland was warmly commended for its frankness in the assessments of its progress to date and areas where it would seek to make further advances. In particular, Switzerland’s agreement to the recommendation that it accede to the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture was welcomed. The United Kingdom also recognized the importance that Switzerland had attached to civil society involvement in the Universal Periodic Review process.
MAURICE PIER, of Indian Movement “Tupaj Amaru”, on behalf of World Peace Council, was concerned that Switzerland’s attitude to housing and land rights would have a negative effect on respect for those rights worldwide. The Special Rapporteur on adequate housing had stated that the eviction at the RHINO collective had violated housing rights. As noted by Brazil, the federal structure of Switzerland could not be used as an excuse to avoid respecting its human rights obligations. It welcomed Switzerland’s support for non-governmental organizations to deliver general statements at this stage of the Universal Periodic Review process. However, communication with civil society, and in particular with victims of human rights violations, should not be limited to 20 minutes every four years.
DANIEL BOLOMEY, of Amnesty International, thanked the Swiss delegation for having organised open-ended consultations with civil society. The recommendations agreed to were appreciated, but a firm commitment towards building a Swiss human rights institution would also be welcome. More problematic was the refusal of other important recommendations. Amnesty International deplored that Switzerland would not sign the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers. It was enough to cite as a reason that that instrument was not in keeping with the federal law.
CLAUDE CAHN, of the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions, said that they were concerned at the views on economic, social and cultural rights expressed by the Swiss Government during the interactive dialogue. The Government considered that the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights served as guidelines for the State’s legislation and policies. However, those rights were programmatic in nature and did not necessarily lead to rights before the court. That view was clearly incompatible with Switzerland’s obligations under the Covenant. The Centre welcomed the fact that the Romanian Government had raised adequate housing issues during the interactive dialogue. No due remedy had been provided to victims of the 2007 forced evictions of persons from the Rhino collective housing project, nor in the matter of the forced closure of the Rhino association and the arbitrary seizure of its assets. Further, they were concerned at the threats levelled by the Public Prosecutor against persons residing at the Geneva Tulipiers residence. They urged the Swiss authorities to adhere to due process requirements in that case.
IVAN K. SOTIROV, of Prison Fellowship International, said Switzerland was the unsung hero in the area of defending and promoting human rights for a vulnerable group of the global population – over 10 million people in various forms of detention and imprisonment. It commended the Swiss development aid in this particular area. The Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation had contributed in many cases to the delivery costs of humanitarian material, together with private donors form several countries. It also supported more than 20 seminars on promoting human rights and on building up the capacity for good governance and leadership growth.
JOHN FISHER, of the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, appreciated the detailed and clear responses of the Swiss delegation; it showed transparency. The distribution of responses in advance would, however, have been welcome. Serious concerns were expressed about the refusal of recommendation 18 (discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation). It was noted that Switzerland was committed to fighting discrimination and thus was there was no ground to why it could not accept that recommendation, other than to single out a single group. Switzerland was encouraged to put in place a national law against discrimination.
PAUL SEGER, Director of the International Law Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland, in concluding remarks, said, first, he wanted to clear up some of the misunderstandings that seemed to continue to be brought up on economic, social and cultural rights. Switzerland considered its international law obligations in full, with no distinctions made based on the nature of those obligations or their binding force.
Switzerland ran on a monist system, where international treaties were automatically applied. Economic, social and cultural rights were also imbedded in the constitution. With regard to discrimination based on sexual orientation, Switzerland took a comprehensive approach to such cases and did not want to exclude any group or prohibit any group. As he had mentioned earlier, Switzerland had taken measures to further the legal status of same sex partners.
Mr. Seger said it was impressive to hear the high calibre of statements made during the dialogue today. Switzerland believed that that constructive dialogue should continue, and should not wait four years to do it again. In the context of civil society, the Universal Periodic Review process had provided a chance to break the barriers traditionally present for engagement with civil society. Switzerland’s next steps were to ensure that the review continued and to confirm their genuine commitment to the process by informing the Council on progress. Switzerland had established a coalition of 30 non-governmental organizations, with a view to contributing to continuing dialogue that initially had been responsible for the preparation of the beginning of the national report. It would follow up and monitor activities to inform the status of the recommendations accepted before the next report in 2012. Switzerland reiterated its commitment to the tangible improvement of human rights in its territory.
Consideration of Outcome of Universal Periodic Review for Report on Republic of Korea
SUNG-JOO LEE, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea to the United Nations Office at Geneva, reiterated the Republic of Korea’s full support for the Universal Periodic Review mechanism, as well as its unswerving commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights, a priority in their national agenda. Following the Universal Periodic Review process in May, the Government had accorded its thorough consideration to all the recommendations made by the Member States. The Republic of Korea believed that the 33 recommendations set out in the Universal Periodic Review Working Group Report encompassed almost all key human rights issues whether longstanding or relatively new. As part of the effort to gain a clearer overall picture of the recommendations, an inter-ministerial meeting had been held, including all the ministries that had been involved in the review process, which had undertaken a thorough study of the human rights issues raised in the review process.
As a result, the Republic of Korea had accepted most of the recommendations made, in whole or in part, Mr. Lee noted. It was pleased to accept all recommendations related to women’s rights. The Republic of Korea had been consistent in pursuing a policy of advancing women’s rights. The Government would also intensify efforts to protect the rights of foreign workers by upholding relevant laws. It would continue to exert efforts to protect the rights of disabled people, and it was pursuing domestic procedures for the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The Republic of Korea further welcomed recommendations related to implementations and observations by treaty bodies.
Mr. Lee said that, for some recommendations, there was a need for further study. Recommendations advocating further ratification and accession of human rights treaties would be considered by the Government. Issues such as the death penalty, the National Security Law and conscientious objection to military service also required further study. Recommendations in the areas of torture, corporal punishment and security surveillance laws would entail amendment of important provisions of domestic law and, there to,k careful thought was required. Withdrawal of the reservation on Article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights was another matter that required further study. The recommendation on the accession to the International Convention on the Protection of the rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families was the only one that the Government was not in a position to accept at this stage. The Republic of Korea welcomed the spirit of the recommendations, but some provisions of the Convention were in contravention of domestic law.
For the Universal Periodic Review to be credible, follow-up measures were imperative, Mr. Lee observed. The Republic of Korea had therefore begun discussions on a mechanism for the systematic implementation of the recommendations in the coming four years. Even recommendations that the Government had felt unable to accept for the moment would be given due consideration and might be discussed with all stakeholders. The Government would bear in mind all the recommendations made as it sought to strengthen it institutional and policy responses to achieve greater promotion and protection of human rights.
MOKTAR IDHAM MUSA (Malaysia) recognized the positive engagement by the Republic of Korea with the Human Rights Council in the Universal Periodic Review process. It was noted that the Republic of Korea had undertaken numerous positive legislative and policy measures to further improve the human rights situation in the country. Notable improvements had been seen in the areas of the empowerment of women, the rights of children and the rights of the disabled, among others.
CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) said that in the interactive dialogue held on the 7 May 2008 they had made a number of recommendations and they would have liked to hear in detail the steps and measures taken to address those recommendations, but that would not be the case. On the recommendation regarding the abolition of certain security measures, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea would like to hear further details regarding the measures and steps taken to address such cases.
JAEMAN PARK, of the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea, said the National Human Rights Commission had actively participated in the Universal Periodic Review process. It welcomed the final 33 recommendations, all of which fell within the Commission’s core mandate. With regard to recommendations on the death penalty and the National Security Law, it was observed that the Commission had already addressed recommendations to the Government calling for their abolition. The Commission had also recommended the amendment of the Assembly and Demonstration Act. It regretted that those recommendations had not been implemented. It welcomed the Republic of Korea’s re-election to the Human Rights Council. The Commission was committed to the working with the Government and civil society for the promotion and protection of human rights.
CHAN-GEUN LEE, of Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), in a joint statement with People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, expressed appreciation to the States who had addressed the critical human rights issues in the Republic of Korea and those which had highlighted the issues of freedom of assembly, migrant workers and irregular workers. Disappointment was expressed over the inadequate and evasive responses of the Republic of Korea on those issues. Simply citing legislation could not address shortcomings in a sufficient manner. The recommendation to harmonize the right to freedom of association with international human rights standards was echoed. The Government was also called to take measures to improve the implementation of the relevant legislation regarding migrant workers.
ARVIND NARRAIN, of the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, regarding the recommendation in the Working Group report that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation be included in the draft anti-discrimination bill, wished to note the exclusion of six other categories from the bill: educational status, family type, military status, nationality, language, and criminal or detention record. The Network was concerned that last November seven categories from the original version of the proposed bill as recommended by the National Human Rights Commission had been dropped without any public discussion or reasonable explanations. They were deeply concerned that it might provide a basis for further structural and interpersonal violence upon sexual minorities, such as political-religious groups publicly announcing that if homosexuality was allowed the morals of society would collapse. In order to fully acknowledge the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the non-discrimination law had to be inclusive and explicit.
MARIANNE LILLIEBJERG, of Amnesty International, welcomed the call on the Government to pass a law abolishing the death penalty and the call to abolish the National Security Law, or to amend it. It also welcomed the call to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention against torture and the Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances. Several recommendations focused on the need to ensure increased protection of the rights of migrant workers, a concern shared by Amnesty International. Amnesty International also deeply regretted the deportation of the President and Vice-President of the Migrants’ Trade Union. Amnesty International called on the Government of the Republic of Korea to implement recommendations to accede to the Migrant Worker’s Convention. It also called on the Government to follow through on its Human Rights Council election pledge to ratify the four International Labour Organization Conventions.
KIM BYOUNG-JOO, of MINBYUN – Lawyers for a Democratic Society, said that the Working Group report had pointed out that the National Security Law had been arbitrarily limiting the freedom of expression and association in the Republic of Korea and had recommended its abolition several times. The Government had replied that the law was applied in a targeted way and was not overused; that was not true. There were number of examples that the Government had abused the law. The police had censored certain websites without a court order. The Government was strongly urged to follow the recommendation of the Universal Periodic Review Working Group and to abolish the National Security Law as soon as possible.
SUNG-JOO LEE, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea to the United Nations Office at Geneva, in concluding remarks, said that the Universal Periodic Review was a valuable process for the Government in establishing and addressing human rights. The Government had taken into consideration the case of migrant workers, and national security. The Working Group process had addressed a number of the comments made and responses could be found in the national report and his earlier opening statement. The Government had affirmed that the National Security Law should not be misused or misinterpreted. There were mechanisms in place to avoid abuses and to ascertain the constitutionality of the law’s application. The interaction among all relevant stakeholders would be vital and provide valuable assistance in the follow-up process. The Universal Periodic Review would lead to improvement of human rights situation in the long run, and the Republic of Korea was firmly supportive of its continuation.
With reference to a number of points raised by civil society, the Government had always allowed for lawful and peaceful demonstrations, Mr. Lee added. However, when people used violence and engaged in unlawful actions, enforcement officials had to take the necessary measures to protect society and restore order.
For use of the information media; not an official record
HRC08071E