COUNCIL HEARS PRESENTATION OF REPORTS BY SPECIAL PROCEDURES ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND COUNTERING TERRORISM, TORTURE AND ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES

The Human Rights Council this morning heard presentations of reports by Martin Scheinin, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism; Manfred Nowak, the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; and Santiago Corcuera, the Chairperson of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances.

Also this morning, the Council concluded its interactive dialogue on the reports of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De Schutter; the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, Catarina de Albuquerque; and the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, Raquel Rolnik.

Martin Scheinin, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism, in presenting his report, encouraged more Member States to enter into a dialogue with his mandate, ideally during the preparatory stage of the adoption of new counter-terrorism legislation or legislation on terrorism-related offences. He welcomed the fact that Egypt and Chile had extended an invitation for a country visit. However, outstanding visit requests to Algeria, Malaysia, Pakistan, Peru and Thailand remained. The report called for the complete eradication of the institution of incommunicado detention, and dealt with the role of intelligence agencies and their oversight mechanisms in combating terrorism in compliance with human rights, among others.

Spain spoke as a concerned country.

Manfred Nowak, Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in presenting his report, noted that he had undertaken three country visits: to Denmark, the Republic of Moldova and Equatorial Guinea. The death penalty in light of the prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, and applying a human rights-based approach to drug control policies were addressed in the current report. To date, the death penalty had been primarily addressed in relation to the right to life - and in spite of some decisions finding for example detention on death row or certain execution methods to constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, the jurisprudence of international human rights monitoring bodies had never arrived at the conclusion that capital punishment per se violated the prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.

Santiago Corcuera, Chairperson of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances, in presenting the report of the Working Group, said that since its creation, the Working Group had transmitted over 50,000 individual cases to Governments all over the world. The Group noted five major areas of concern, which included measures taken by Member States to address terrorism that may relate to or even amount to enforced disappearances; that very few States had taken specific measures under criminal law to define enforced disappearances as a separate criminal offence and to bring their existing legislation in line with the Declaration; in too many countries persons who had the right to denounce cases of enforced disappearances to a competent and independent authority, still could not have their complaint promptly, thoroughly, and impartially investigated; the question of disappearances had a special resonance with women; and the right to truth should be enjoyed by all victims of enforced disappearance.

At the beginning of the meeting, the Council concluded its interactive dialogue on the right to food, safe drinking water and sanitation, and adequate housing. A number of issues were raised by speakers which included differentiating between achieving self sufficiency and ensuring food security; the emphasis that the conclusion of the Doha round would play an important and useful role in opening up new opportunities for developing countries and improving food security of vulnerable populations; in the context of adequate housing it was important to share information on how Governments were framing and implementing human rights principle and not profiting in that field; and on how the lack of access to clean water often stemmed from poverty but also reinforced it. Many speakers also commended the Special Rapporteur on the right to food on his approach to development cooperation and food aid as a universal obligation.

Speaking in the interactive dialogue on the right to food, safe drinking water and adequate housing were representatives of Egypt, Iran, Cameroon, Algeria, Colombia, European Commission, Cambodia, Italy, Romania, Mauritius, Luxembourg, Slovenia, Portugal, Chile, New Zealand, Djibouti, Bangladesh, India and Morocco.

The Commission on Human Rights of Philippines took the floor. Also speaking were representatives of non-governmental organizations from: Human Rights Advocates, Amnesty International, Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples, Foodfirst Information and Action Network (FIAN), in a joint statement with Europe-Third World Centre, Asian Legal Resource Centre, Lawyers for a Democratic Society, General Federation of Iraqi Women, International Federation of Rural Adult Catholic Movements, World Vision International, and Interfaith International.

At 3 p.m. this afternoon, the Council will hold its interactive dialogue on the reports on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism; on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; and on enforced or involuntary disappearances. Thereafter the Council will begin consideration of the respective reports of the Special Rapporteur on the freedom of religion or belief and the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders.


Continuation of Interactive Dialogue on Right to Food, Access to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation, and Adequate Housing

OMAR SHALABY (Egypt) said it was important to ensure the right to food, in particular with relation to the ongoing financial crisis. With regards to the report of the Independent Expert on access to safe drinking water, this followed the analytical approach contained in the resolution establishing her mandate. Egypt would be pleased to welcome the Independent Expert's visit to Egypt, and would like to be informed of the methodology and conceptual approach she intended to use beyond the first year.

TAHEREHNAZARI (Iran) said, regarding the report presented by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Iran commended his approach in seeing development cooperation and food aid as an universal obligation. Iran asked the Special Rapporteur to share his thoughts about how to create a mechanism to realize this obligation and monitor its fulfillment. Concerning the report presented by the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing, Iran expressed its concern on the cases of discrimination related to housing which had been reflected in the report and which included exclusionary policy development and other policies which in particular affected minorities and migrants. The denial of loans in relation to race which according to the report was occurring in some countries was also a matter of concern.

There was one situation which needed extraordinary attention of the mandate holders. For a period of two years, the Israeli regime had cut off vital services including water, electricity and gasoline and severely restricted the flow of goods into the Gaza Strip. This exacerbated the dire living conditions of the population in Gaza. The people in Gaza were suffering a severe condition in terms of having access to food and sanitation. The children and women were the most vulnerable groups in that situation. Iran asked the Special Rapporteurs if they planned to visit the Palestinian Occupied Territories. Iran also asked the Special Rapporteurs to explain their activities in order to highlight the situation of human rights in Gaza in terms of having access to food and water.

PROSPER N. BOMBA (Cameroon) noted the quality of the reports presented by the Special Rapporteurs and Independent Expert. Cameroon reasserted its determination to implement human rights in the country, in particular, on the right to adequate housing. The Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing highlighted the need to respect international commitments, and the Government of Cameroon had at heart those commitments as well. The Government was also greatly concerned with providing shelter to those living in areas devastated by floods, as was seen in March 2008. Given the effects of the floods, which created a highly precarious situation for the people living in those areas, the Government continued to provide assistance to those people. Cameroon was also taking measures to address illegal occupation of land in the country as a result of persons being displaced. The Government further reasserted its desire to seek fruitful exchanges with the Special Rapporteurs and the Independent Expert.

LAZHAR SOUALEM (Algeria) said the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food should give more information on the evolution of the provision of food aid, in comparison with the rise of hunger, which should give a clearer concept of the situation, and of the situation of the obligation to provide food aid. With regards to the report of the Independent Expert on water and sanitation, this was the prime mechanism which could protect water resources. Sanitation had not received similar attention as had the right to water, and the Independent Expert’s intent to focus on this right was commended. The Independent Expert should interact with the Special Rapporteur on the right to food so that the latter did not prevail over the right to drinking water, and to ensure a balance.

On the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to housing, the analysis thereof was a mirror of the financial crisis that was in effect worldwide, denying millions their economic and social rights. Financial regulations adopted should take account of the vulnerability and low resources of low-income house owners.

DANIEL AVILA CAMACHO (Colombia) made additional comments in relation to a communication of 28 December 2007 in which the Special Rapporteurs on the right to food, on the rights of indigenous peoples and of human rights defenders expressed their concern over the death of members of indigenous peoples caused by antipersonnel mines. Colombia reaffirmed that the armed forces of Colombia did not use any antipersonnel mines. The indigenous community of the Awa which was the subject of the communication of the Special Rapporteurs was heavily affected by the armed group which had been operating in a legal grey zone and had been using antipersonnel mines, threatening the lives of the civil population. The violent acts committed by such groups against the indigenous community of the Awa were characterized by cruelty and barbarism, similar to the massacre committed on 8 members of the Awa by the armed group of the FARC. Once the massacre was committed, the FARC laid antipersonnel mines around the corpses of the indigenous in order to avoid their retrieval. The Colombian forces position against antipersonnel mines was internationally recognized and it was important to note that this topic was a major fundamental subject with the public opinion in Colombia.

DAVIDE ZARU, of the European Commission, said the European Commission paid close attention to the endeavours of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, and in particular to his consideration of ways and means to overcome obstacles to the realisation of the right to food. With regard to the main report which recommended that donors engage with their partners into the preparation of regular joint assessments of the impact of development cooperation on the realisation of the right to adequate food, the European Commission asked, how, in practical terms, could those assessments be implemented? What synergies with traditional international reporting could be envisaged? Furthermore, the European Commission would be grateful if the Rapporteur could further elaborate on his recommendation that World Trade Organization members should “define their position in trade negotiations in accordance with national strategies for the implementation of the right to food”.

SUN SUON (Cambodia) said with regards to the report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing and the section relating to the alleged land-grabbing and illegal sale of indigenous Jarai land, the delegation wished to inform the Council that the related case was subject to legal proceedings that were still continuing. The delegation wished to reiterate that land grabbing was not the policy of the Government of Cambodia - the Special Rapporteur should have been aware that the Government had taken serious steps and measures to address the relevant issue, while also being mindful of historical, political, economic, social and other dimensions. In addition, the Government attached great importance to the livelihood and social welfare of indigenous and ethnic communities.

The Government had already undertaken a number of land reform programmes with the support of the development partners, emphasising its efforts to protect the rights of the most vulnerable groups of people. In the national report submitted to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights this year, reference was made to minority development programmes, highlighting a number of priorities relating to the institutional and other activities along with the progress achieved and the sustained efforts of the Government to further address relevant issues and implement on-going programmes and policies, especially those pertaining to the rights and interest of the indigenous and ethnic community, including the protection and ownership of their land and environment.

ROBERTO NOCELLE (Italy) said that Italy welcomed the Special Rapporteur on the right to food and the presentation of his first annual report to the Human Rights Council that focused on the contribution of development cooperation and food aid to the realization of the right to food. Italy stressed that it placed high importance to food security. In particular, the Italian Government was willing to take stock of the recent global food crisis and to assess ways to properly face possible situations of widespread emergency. Italy highlighted that for the first time a meeting among G8 Ministers of Agriculture enlarged to other countries and also to the Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Food Programme, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, the United Nations High Level Task Force and the World Bank would be convened in Italy under the Italian Presidency of the G8 on 18 to 20 April 2009.

It seemed important to recall that the theme of food security along with food quality would be at the center of the Exhibition to be held in Milan, whose inspirational title was “feeding the planet, energy for all”. The discussions held with the Human Rights Council, in view of these important events, were enriching opportunities to broaden the current debate from the fundamental angle of human rights. Italy thanked Mr. Olivier de Schutter for his valuable effort in this direction.

MARIA CIOBANU (Romania) said Romania congratulated the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing for the quality of her report. Ms. Rolnik’s decision to follow-up on the country visits undertaken by her predecessor was saluted. Romania was one of the countries that received the visit of Mr. Miloon Kothari in 2002. With regard to addendum 2 to the thematic report on adequate housing, and in particular on national housing policy, according to the Romanian Constitution, the State was bound to take appropriate measures to ensure a decent standard of living for all its citizens, including the right to decent housing. Romania stressed that building, distributing and managing social and emergency housing fell within the responsibility of local authorities, with financial support from the State budget.

Romania said that housing could not be discussed or solved outside the general socio-economic context. This became even more obvious when dealing with disadvantaged categories of the population. For example, in the case of the Roma minority, statistics showed that, given their higher rates of unemployment, members of the Roma minority had a more limited access to housing provided by the local authorities to young families. During the last years, a number of measures had been put in place by the public authorities to address this problem.

SUBHAS GUJADHUR (Mauritius) said with the looming financial and economic crises attracting the attention of the media, the food crisis tended to be forgotten, and this was dangerous, and this was why the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food was timely and important. The task of reducing the number of hungry people by 500 million in the remaining seven years to 2015 would require an enormous and resolute global effort and concrete actions. As stated in the report of the Special Rapporteur, while many African countries were net food exporting countries until the 1970s, they had become for the most part net food importing countries since the 1980s, due partly to the lack of investment in agriculture and partly to the agricultural subsidies in developed market economies. It was the dependency on food imports which produced the most impact on the right to access to food and the right to adequate food.

For far too long, economic and human rights discourses had operated on separate planes, with proponents on each side assuming that they had little to learn from one another. The rights-based approach emphasised Government obligations to ensure that people were free from hunger and ultimately that they had sustainable access to adequate and nutritious food. The Agreement on Agriculture had several shortcomings - instead of seeking to redress the imbalance, WTO rules had locked all countries into the existing unfair system, which was characterised by many developing countries having few trade barriers, leaving them little policy space to reintroduce trade policies to support their agriculture sector. Because of the complex relationship between trade in agriculture and human rights as well as other areas of international trade law, more detailed studies were necessary to assess the impact of concrete measures that targeted groups or countries.

JEAN FEYDER (Luxembourg) said that Luxembourg had a special interest in the work of Ms. Albuquerque, the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation. It would be helpful if the report could have been published earlier and not only in one working language. Luxembourg wanted to add the following corrections: In 2009, public development aid by Luxembourg amounted to 0,92 percent of the GDP, more than half of this was devoted to the least developed countries. The share for the development of agriculture had been increased considerably. Further, the quality of assistance was as important to Luxembourg as was the volume. Luxembourg was very attached to the Paris Principles which had been affirmed in Accra last September. On the predictability of aid, Luxembourg said that it had taken five-year-long financial commitments. Also, it had committed to contributions of each year that were at least of the same amount as those of the last year. Luxembourg asked: what was the share that should be reserved on a global level to food aid and what share should go to the development of agriculture?

ANDREJ LOGAR (Slovenia) commended the Special Rapporteur, Mr. De Schutter for his work and welcomed his first report, which focused on the role of development cooperation and food aid in realizing the right to adequate food. In addition to the questions posed by the Czech Republic on behalf of the European Union, considering the Special Rapporteur’s findings and the interesting discussion on the issue, Slovenia asked what were his intentions in the promotion and protection of the right to food in concrete situations, inter alia in Zimbabwe? With regard to the second addendum of the report on the right to food, where the Special Rapporteur explained agreements under the World Trade Organization, he recommended that private sector actors along with the State should discharge measures to ensure the right to adequate food. Slovenia asked Mr. De Schutter to further elaborate on what those measures were?

RAQUEL TAVARES (Portugal) said Portugal was pleased to welcome the Independent Expert on safe drinking water and sanitation, and fully supported the mandate, hoping that it would contribute to advance the protection and promotion of such an important human rights issue. The thematic approach was also supported. Although preliminary in nature, the report described the conceptual framework concerning water and human rights, and provided an overview of the problem of lack of access to sanitation, and its connection to other human rights violations.

Portugal had the following questions: in the contacts already established by the Independent Expert, had she identified any best practices concerning access to sanitation that she wished to share; did the current global crisis aggravate the problems of those affected by lack of access to sanitation and if so what measures did the Independent Expert envisage to tackle this issue in the present context; and what issues would the Independent Expert focus on in the following years.

LUCIANO PARODI (Chile) said that housing programmes should take into account the development of cities and macrosocial and historic development in countries which led to different housing policies. However, Chile had methodological concerns regarding what data the studies had been based. In some cases, the reports did not take full account of the developments that had taken place until the publication of the report. This was the case with Chile, which had not been updated. The Government of President Bachelet had already tackled the inadequacies that had been pointed out in the report. The states concerned had begun a vast plan in order to meet the need of adequate housing. Further, this plan was a fundamental pillar to overcome poverty and was a part of the social programme to build 400,000 dwellings. During the current Government, there had been a new definition of housing solutions, which had improved the designs of housing and the connection to the transport system. There was a system for the purchase of dwellings where the user could choose a dwelling which was close to his social net and already established neighbourhoods.

WENDY HINTON (New Zealand) thanked all the Special Rapporteurs for their annual reports and presentations. Given time restrictions, the intervention of New Zealand would only focus on one mandate, the right to food. With respect to the Special Rapporteur’s field visit to the World Trade Organization, New Zealand said it strongly agreed that food security of vulnerable populations in developing countries was a critical issue that needed to be addressed. The Government believed that trade could and did play a vital role in achieving this objective. Trade complimented domestic production and played an important role in ensuring that vulnerable populations had adequate access to basic food items. Therefore it was important to differentiate between achieving self sufficiency and ensuring food security.

New Zealand believed that the successful conclusion of the Doha round would play an important and useful role in opening up new opportunities for developing countries and improving food security of vulnerable populations. New Zealand asked the Special Rapporteur to elaborate on the distinction between food self-sufficiency and achieving food security for vulnerable populations; and asked him to comment on the role of the special and differential provisions in the Doha round which protected the interests of vulnerable populations.

DAHER DSAMA ABBAS (Djibouti) said the active and key role of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food in mediating between the different stakeholders to ensure that the right be taken into account by all was to be commended. There should be international cooperation for the countries most in need, based on the principles of non-discrimination as well as non-regression, allowing countries to consider their needs on a long-term basis. The Council should ensure increased vigilance to ensure that such a basic right as the right to housing was not affected by the financial crisis. The concerns of the Special Rapporteur for the better integration of the right to housing in all programmes and policies by public authorities was also Djibouti's concern, who encouraged this right. The existence of incentives for the most disadvantaged parts of the population had demonstrated the commitment at the highest level in Djibouti in this regard.

MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh) said that the Special Rapporteur on the right to food had picked up a very important subject. The donor countries should move away from food aid to the obligation of support of less developed countries. Food aid was most effective in crisis situations. Concerning access to water and sanitation, Bangladesh appreciated the decision of the Rapporteur to focus on sanitation. Over a billion of persons all over the world lacked access to water. Bangladesh appreciated the report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing and said that the report was timely. It was important to share information how Governments were framing and implementing human rights principle and not profiting in that field. Bangladesh was strongly affected by climate change and would lose housing if the sea level continued to rise. Bangladesh requested the Special Rapporteur to reflect on this subject in her future reports.

ABHISHEK VERMA (India) thanked the Special Rapporteur, Olivier De Schutter, on the right to food, for his first report to the Council. India said that the Special Rapporteur argued that the Paris Declaration could be further concretized if placed under a human rights based approach. The Special Rapporteur also highlighted the urgent need to reform development assistance and food aid, which was welcomed. From a human rights stand point the Special Rapporteur made a good case of how human rights law obliged States to fulfil their international obligations. India stressed that the Special Rapporteur had also pointed out the shortcomings of food aid conventions. The Special Rapporteur in his report stressed the need to change the relationship between the donor and recipient to be one of a triangular relationship.

India said that the Special Rapporteur also emphasized the valuation of development assistance and food aid assistance through a joint partnership between donors, recipients, and local organizations without discrimination. India continued to be deeply concerned regarding the challenges faced by food security and the right to food, being a country that provided one sixth of the world’s food. India reiterated its support to review closely the recommendations in the report.

OMAR HILALE (Morocco) said Morocco was motivated by a strong political will and had devoted a key share of the different economic and social plans to water and sanitation, by a whole range of measures and instruments, ensuring that Morocco had a host of new dams, which had made a considerable difference to the provision of drinking water. Morocco had also prioritised the housing sector in the national policies, ensuring democracy in access to adequate housing, with ongoing efforts to fight insalubrious housing, highlighting the need for global integrated programming for the cities of Morocco, as well as support for households, facilitating home ownership through various means, including increased access to financial means.

All of these measures concerned the whole of Morocco, taking account of the climate, and major projects had been undertaken. There were projects for housing including 70,000 units for the social housing sector, and there was promotion of real-estate construction.

CECILIA R. V. QUISUMBING, of the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines, agreed with the Independent Expert that market forces should not be allowed to be the only determining factor when it came to building infrastructure. Especially vulnerable groups such as the poor and children suffered considerably from a lack of access to water and sanitation. The Commission underlined that a lack of access to clean water often stemmed from poverty but also reinforced poverty. The vulnerable groups had less access to all basic services than the rest of the society. The Commission noted that many non-governmental organizations were already active in the field, especially regarding the monitoring of the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. The Commission of Human Rights of the Philippines agreed with the Special Rapporteur that human rights obligations of States should be developed further in the field of water and that national institutions had to be built in this area. The World Water Forum was one such institution where decision makers could be convinced to use more human rights based approaches. In the building of large infrastructures, big international financial institutions had a large influence. Their approaches should include and not ignore human rights obligations. The Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines reiterated that the lack of access to sanitation often negated the access to clear water and underlined that it was eager to work together with all of the Special Rapporteurs that had presented their reports earlier on.

OLIVIER DE SCHUTTER, Special Rapporteur on the right to food, in his response to questions raised during the interactive dialogue, thanked all the delegations who supported the recommendations contained in the report on development cooperation and food aid, which sought to have food aid contribute to long term food security, among other things. Although providing development cooperation, donor States should ensure that they followed through on their commitments within the timelines set. Donor States commitments should be based on the needs that needed to be satisfied and not on the commitment donor States felt were adequate. Those obligations to provide aid and predictable levels of development cooperation should have been seen under the right to development under international law. Mr. De Schutter argued in his report that this relationship should be reformed. By including members of civil society and other relevant actors to help manage aid, this was one way that reforms could be envisaged.

Specifically, Mr. De Schutter suggested that a re-commitment on behalf of States providing food aid was necessary, and should be assessed with respect to the needs of recipient States rather than being measured in tons of food. Due to bad harvest or bad weather or sudden increase in the prices of food commodities, this should be taken into consideration in this context. The Special Rapporteur reiterated a question posed by Slovenia, on how the Special Rapporteur intended to regulate the measures of transcorporations in agro-fuel production; and he said he was working very closely on this issue with representative of the Secretary-General on transnational corporations, and additionally with the Government of Germany this coming June in a consultation on the issue. Brazil expressed reservations with regard to the not having placed more emphasis on State subsidies. Mr. De Schutter said that there was a deep misunderstanding on this issue, and stressed that the report was not based on current negotiations. The report included three pillars on access to markets in this context. Export subsidies were the most harmful types of subsidies, underscored Mr. De Schutter. The comment made by Brazil missed the point of the report. Moreover, one of the ways to balance the negative effects of trade liberalization was by performing regular impact assessments, among other things.

LESLIE BURNETT, of Human Rights Advocates, said there was concern that despite the multitude of extremely relevant and influential international treaties, declarations and others, including General Comment 15 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child and others, the human right to water remained an implicit right rather than an explicit right. Water insecurity consigned billions of people to lives of poverty and disease, kept women and children from education, and was one of the most daunting crises of the 21st Century. A recognition of human rights obligations in relation to the accessibility of safe water and sanitation was not enough. Human Rights Advocates asked the Independent Expert if a rights-based approach premised on the duty to respect, fulfil and to protect the human right to water would help facilitate the implementation of her mandate. With regards to the right to food, Human Rights Advocates asked the Special Rapporteur if a study of foreign land acquisitions would be useful for ensuring accountability and protection of the right to food.

PATRIZIA SCANELLA, of Amnesty International, said, regarding adequate housing and the Special Rapporteur’s visit to Canada, the report highlighted the role of gender and race discrimination in perpetuating homelessness and poverty in a country where most of the population enjoyed a high standard of living. It also highlighted the situation of indigenous peoples, whose rights to land were inadequately protected and who faced inequality and discrimination both in the delivery of services in their own communities and in access to adequate housing in Canadian cities. Concerning the visit to Cambodia, Amnesty International said that the recommendations made three years ago were still pertinent today. In 2008 alone, Amnesty International received reports of about 27 forced evictions, affecting an estimated 23,000 people. It called on the Cambodian Government to cease all forced evictions immediately, and to develop and adopt guidelines for evictions, based on the basic principles and guidelines on development–based evictions and displacement and which complied with international human rights law. Until such steps had been taken, the Cambodian Government should introduce a moratorium on mass evictions.

GIANFRANCO FATTORINI, of Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples, thanked the Special Rapporteur on the right to food for the reports submitted, and reiterated that they were only provided in English. Although the Special Rapporteur was right in highlighting food aid obligations, it was important to note that 920 million victims of famine and malnutrition were farmers. With regard to the portion of the report concerning the mission to the World Trade Organization, they said that there were some questions that should not be debated in this forum. There was a general obligation under many resolutions to promote the economic and social progress of all peoples.

MATIAS MARGULIS, of Foodfirst Information and Action Network (FIAN), in a joint statement with Europe-Third World Centre, said it wished to commend the role played by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food in the current efforts to promote a prominent role for the right to food in the search for responses to the food crisis. FIAN International welcomed the statement in favour of the inclusion of the right to food as the third track in the strategy against hunger. FIAN International reiterated the role of human rights violations and misguided policies in provoking the food crisis, and appealed to States to take their human rights obligations seriously and to respect human rights principles such as the priority given to the most vulnerable, participation and accountability. States should not deprive the United Nations of the global governance over the food system - on the contrary, the role of existing United Nations institutions should be strengthened. Only such governance had the potential to guarantee the respect of key universal standards like human rights.

MICHAEL ANTHONY, of the Asian Legal Resource Centre, said that, concerning housing, in the Republic of Korea on 20 January 2009, five protestors and one policeman had been killed in clashes when 1,500 policemen were sent to disperse some 50 protestors demonstrating against the planned forced eviction during the winter without sufficient compensation of 127 tenants in Seoul. Had the Special Rapporteur intervened with the Government concerning this case and had she received any response? The Asian Legal Resource Centre was concerned that further forced eviction and repression would ensue, as approximately 10 percent of the residential areas in Seoul were set to be redeveloped. Concerning the right to food, the organization urged the Special Rapporteur to pay particular attention to the situation in India, which had amongst the highest populations of malnourished children in the world, despite having a food surplus. The Asian Legal Resource Centre had documented numerous cases of malnutrition and deaths from starvation in India’s rural lower caste communities.

Mr. CHANG, of Lawyers for a Democratic Society, said that Democratic Society appreciated the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing for his extensive focus on the urgent need of human rights-based public housing policies and the issue of forced evictions which severely threatened the livelihoods of the poor and marginalized people. They noted with grave concern that the reality was much further from those commitments and obligations of States. A large number of cases of forced evictions had been witnessed across the globe including Bangladesh, Brazil, and Cambodia among others.

Ms. HAMDAN, of General Federation of Iraqi Women, said the problem facing housing today was not solely down to economic reasons, but also as a direct result of war and occupation in different parts of the world. Regarding the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, the problem was not merely financial aid, but also the result of war and occupation. In reference to the Working Group on water - no one doubted that access to clean water was a fundamental human right - and the Group should consider the effects of war and occupation on the availability of water.

Mr. MIOT, of the International Federation of Rural Adult Catholic Movements, said that, regarding the right to food, the Special Rapporteur had established clear limits of liberal markets. The Federation thanked him for this suggestion and fully supported it. These markets were not beneficial neither to the consumers nor to the farmers who received less and less for their products. It was vital to recognize the nature of agricultural products: they were not just like any other commodities. The Doha round, whose agricultural dimension was one of its obstacles, should be brought to an end to encourage multilateralism in the agricultural sector. The Federation’s question to the Special Rapporteur was as follows: what obstacles existed in the realization of the right to food in order to make the trade of food commodities compatible with human rights?

Ms. PHILPOT-NISSEN, of World Vision International, thanked the Special Rapporteur on the right to food for his report to the Council, and welcomed the empathies on development cooperation and food aid. The obligation on behalf of States was reaffirmed by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, among other international human rights instruments. World Vision International considered that the policies on the right to food that needed to be reformed were not just reduced to include aid levels. World Vision urged the Special Rapporteur to engage in a good context of assessment to ensure that the right aid and policy was achieved. Efforts to broaden consultation and cooperation with relevant actors further contributed to better strategies to ensure to realization of the right to adequate food.

Mr. GALLAOUI, of Interfaith International, said it was important to highlight that the right to food was as important and sacred as having access to air to breathe, as both were indispensable for life. As civil society activists and human rights defenders, all were obliged to unite their efforts and step up their work to ensure that a healthy and complete food diet be guaranteed to every inhabitant of the planet in a civil and democratic way. Armed conflicts reduced the opportunity for food, this right of cardinal importance, and even deprived some of it altogether.

CATARINA ALBUQUERQUE, Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, said that she was available for bilateral discussions with all interested delegations. Regarding the attention that was paid to sanitation, the issue had to be set up on the international agenda, discussion on the issue had to be forced and legal content had to be developed. She wanted to make it clear that there were legal obligations concerning sanitation and that this was not a matter of charity. Concerning best practices, the Human Rights Council had asked her to collect best practices in a human rights framework. On the impact of a legal framework on the realization of the right to sanitation and the realization of the Millennium Development Goals, she said that she had not yet looked into the issue but would pay attention to the subject in the future. She thanked the European Union for this suggestion.

Regarding measures to achieve Millennium Development Goal 7 targets, which was to halve the proportion of people without access to water and sanitation, a distinction had to be made between sanitation and clean water. The Millennium Development Goals target regarding water would be achieved. The issue of sanitation was mostly off track, but it was in theory achievable. This was a question of prioritization. More awareness had to be raised regarding sanitation as a lifesaver, as had been said by several delegations. On the global crisis, there were fears on decreasing financial flows to the developing world. But a minimum core of obligations to fulfill had to be defined and a solution would be to fulfill low-cost programmes. That was not an obstacle to sanitation investments, since these were already low investment-programmes.

Documents on the Promotion of Human Rights while Countering Terrorism, on Torture and other Cruel or Inhuman Treatment, and on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances

The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Martin Scheinin (A/HRC/10/3 and Adds.1-2), which calls for a specific and comprehensive legislative framework to regulate the broader powers that have been given to intelligence agencies in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. The report says the collection and sharing of “signal” intelligence has led to several violations of the right to privacy and the principle of non-discrimination, while “human intelligence” – the gathering of intelligence by means of interpersonal contact – has even led to torture and other inhuman treatment. The lack of oversight and political and legal accountability has facilitated illegal activities by intelligence agencies. The Special Rapporteur also clarifies the human rights obligations of States when their intelligence agencies perform joint operations, participate in interrogations and send or receive intelligence for operational use. Among many specific concerns outlined is the sharing of information between intelligence agencies in China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan within the framework of the Shanghai Convention on Combating Terrorism. The Special Rapporteur is also “deeply troubled” by the comprehensive system of extraordinary renditions, prolonged and secret detention, and practices that violate the prohibition against torture and other forms of ill-treatment created by the United States. In recommendations, the Special Rapporteur stresses that information and evidence concerning the civil, criminal or political liability of State representatives, including intelligence agents, for violations of human rights must not be considered worthy of protection as State secrets.

Addendum one to the report contains summaries of communications transmitted to Governments between 15 September 2007 and 31 December 2008, as well as replies received up to 31 January 2009 and press releases issued in 2008. In replies from 13 of the 26 Governments corresponded with during this period, most of the Governments offered detailed substantive information on the allegations received.

A second addendum is a report on the Special Rapporteur’s mission to Spain from 7 to 14 May 2008, which concludes that certain legal definitions of terrorist crimes in Spanish law do not ensure fully respect for the principle of legality. While positive aspects regarding the trial of those accused of the 11 March 2004 bombings carried out by members of an international terrorist cell are highlighted, the Special Rapporteur raises concerns regarding the pre-trial phase and the right to review by a higher court. The use of incommunicado detention is considered in detail and concern is expressed about allegations of torture and other ill-treatment made by terrorism suspects held incommunicado. Finally, the Special Rapporteur recommends that certain measures be taken to ensure full compliance of counter-terrorism measures with international standards of human rights.

The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Manfred Nowak (A/HRC/10/44 and Corr.1 and Adds.1-5), which summarizes the Special Rapporteur’s activities between August and December 2008, including updates on country visits, future visits and pending requests for invitations, and highlights of key presentations and meetings. The report also focuses on the compatibility of the death penalty with the prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. The Special Rapporteur invites the Council to request a comprehensive legal study on the compatibility of the death penalty with the right to personal integrity and human dignity. The report also looks at a human rights-based approach to drug policies, concluding that drug users are often subjected to discriminatory treatment and that States have a positive obligation to ensure the same access to prevention and treatment in places of detention as outside them. He recommends that the Council take up the question of drug policies in the light of international obligations in the area of human rights at a future session.

Addendum one, the preliminary report of the Special Rapporteur’s findings following his mission to Equatorial Guinea from 9 to 18 November 2008, is available in Spanish only.

A second addendum, findings and recommendations of the Special Rapporteur’s mission to Denmark from 2 to 9 May 2008, pays tribute to Denmark’s longstanding leadership in anti-torture efforts worldwide. Following visits to places where persons are deprived of their liberty, such as police stations, prisons and psychiatric institutions, no allegations of torture and very few complaints of ill-treatment from detainees were received. Among concerns are that a specific crime of torture is still missing in Danish criminal law; that action against domestic violence in Greenland has so far not received adequate attention; that solitary confinement continues to be used, particularly with respect to pre-trial detainees; and recent plans to employ diplomatic assurances to return suspected terrorists to countries known for their practice of torture. The Special Rapporteur is encouraged by the establishment of an inter-ministerial working group to investigate alleged Central Intelligence Agency rendition flights operating through Denmark and Greenland, and strongly encouraged the inclusion of independent experts and civil society in a fully transparent process.

Addendum three is the report following a joint visit with other Special Procedures to the Republic of Moldova, including the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova, from 4 to 11 July 2008, which warmly welcomes initiatives under way to prevent torture, in particular the creation of a national preventive mechanism under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture. Nevertheless, the Special Rapporteur concludes that ill-treatment during the initial period of police custody is widespread. He also received serious allegations of torture in some police stations and received information on a number of cases of ill-treatment in institutions under the Ministry of Justice, mainly in terms of inter-prisoner violence. While recently some torture cases have reached the courts, overall, most complaints mechanisms are ineffective. Among recommendations, the Special Rapporteur urges the Government to equip the recently created national preventive mechanism with the necessary human and other resources and that the time limits for police custody be reduced to 48 hours.

A fourth addendum, containing communications from Governments, is not available.

Addendum five contains information concerning follow-up to the recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur on visits to China, Georgia, Jordan, Nepal, Nigeria and Togo.

The Council has before it the report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (A/HRC/10/9 and Add.1), which covers the period 1 December 2007 to 30 November 2008 and reflects communications and cases examined by the Working Group during its sessions in 2008, and general allegations considered at its eighty-third session in 2007. Since its inception, a total of 52,952 cases have been transmitted by the Working Group to Governments, with 42,393 cases, concerning 79 States, still under active consideration. During the period under review, the Working Group transmitted 1,203 new cases of enforced disappearances to the Governments of Algeria, Argentina, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Chad, Colombia, India, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Japan, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Mexico, Morocco, Namibia, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, the Philippines, the Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, the Sudan, Switzerland, Thailand, Turkey, Viet Nam, Yemen and Zimbabwe. A summary of activities during the last year is presented in a table for each country, with a detailed text description of the areas of activity.

A first addendum is the report of the country visit the Working Group conducted to Argentina from 21 to 24 July 2008. Following an Executive Summary, the text of the report is in Spanish only.

Presentation of the Reports on the Promotion of Human Rights while Countering Terrorism, Torture, and Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances

MARTIN SCHEININ, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, said that with a view to his mandate, including the reference to advisory services of technical assistance found in paragraph 2(a) of resolution 6/28, he encouraged more Member States to enter into a dialogue with his mandate, ideally during the preparatory stage of the adoption of new counter-terrorism legislation or legislation on terrorism-related offences. In this context he welcomed the fact that Egypt now was one of the countries that had taken the opportunity to engage with the mandate. A visit to Egypt was planned from 16 to 21 April 2009 for the purpose of learning about and discussing its counter terrorism law and practice. He was also pleased to inform the Council that the Government of Chile had extended an invitation for a country visit in 2010. Unfortunately he expressed his dissatisfaction with other Member States who seemed to have opted for a stalling approach in dealing with his mandate. The Philippines issued an invitation back in June 2006, but had not confirmed or suggested any concrete date for the visit to take place. Yesterday, he had an encouraging meeting with the Tunisian Permanent Mission, as a follow-up to his letter of 11 June 2008, to discuss possible dates for a country visit. There were outstanding visit requests to Algeria, Malaysia, Pakistan, Peru and Thailand. Many other countries were at the correspondence stage between the Government and his mandate.

During 2008, Mr. Scheinin said his country visit was to Spain. He expressed gratitude to the Spanish Government for their invitation and the facilitation of all aspects of the visit that took place from 7 to 14 May 2008. As Spain was a vibrant democracy with a tragic past of dictatorship and a continuing presence of both domestic terrorism and a threat of international terrorism, the mission was very useful in learning about challenges and best practices in the area of respecting human rights while countering terrorism. Those lessons were often painful, as was witnessed through his meetings with victims of terrorism, and through a bomb explosion killing one person during the last night of his visit, committed by the terrorist organization Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA). Despite the challenges, Spain provided a number of examples of best practices in the fight against terrorism. Among other things, its support to human rights at the global level, including to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, its Alliance of Civilizations initiative and its contribution towards the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, were all commendable, underscored Mr. Scheinin.

The report called for the complete eradication of the institution of incommunicado detention, which in the case of Spain primarily meant blocking contact between a terrorism suspect and his or her freely chosen lawyer for up to five days at the initial stage of detention, stressed Mr. Scheinin. With much regret he deplored the fact that Spain proceeded to extradite a Chechen individual to the Russian Federation a day before New Year’s Eve 2008, despite the principal importance of the case, emphasized in his meetings with high-level officials in Madrid during the mission. Further, the main report dealt with the role of intelligence agencies and their oversight mechanisms in combating terrorism in compliance with human rights. Since submitting the report an undeniably important fact took place with the change of the administration in the United States. He welcomed specifically the decision of the United States to actively re-engage as an observer in the Human Rights Council. Moreover, Mr. Scheinin expressed the view that the United States, as a world leader, had a special responsibility in the protection of human rights while countering terrorism.

MANFRED NOWAK, Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, said he had undertaken three country visits: to Denmark, the Republic of Moldova and Equatorial Guinea. He wished to pay tribute to Denmark's long-standing leadership in anti-torture efforts worldwide - it was noteworthy that no allegations of torture and very few complaints of ill-treatment had been received. He had commended the Government's efforts in carrying out successful awareness-raising campaigns on domestic violence and trafficking of women, and had also raised some concerns, such as the fact that no specific crime of torture had been introduced in criminal law, and that relatively frequent recourse to solitary confinement remained problematic. Together with the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, he had visited the Republic of Moldova, which had made great progress in human rights protection since independence in 1991. Both Special Rapporteurs had noted the recent law on preventing and combating family violence and the establishment of a national preventive mechanism. However, they were concerned at the significant gaps between the normative framework and the reality on the ground. In particular, violence against women had not received enough attention and the protective infrastructure for victims of violence was insufficient.

A preliminary note had been issued following the visit to Equatorial Guinea, and a full report would be published in due course. There had been a number of positive developments, such as the adoption of a comprehensive law prohibiting torture and providing for the prosecution of torturers, and some improvement of the conditions in a number of places of detention. However, overall, the Special Rapporteur regretted to report that he found that torture in police and gendarmerie custody was systematic, and impunity was quasi-total as well. The three country visits were well placed to demonstrate a point crucial for successful follow-up: inviting the Special Rapporteur meant allowing scrutiny by an independent expert, which could lead to critical findings with which the host Government could disagree. However, whereas pursuant to his visits, Denmark and the Republic of Moldova took steps to examine all cases and issues identified, in a first reaction, Equatorial Guinea rejected the observations altogether and accused the Special Rapporteur of political bias.

There were two themes also dealt with in the report: the death penalty in light of the prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment; and applying a human rights-based approach to drug control policies. To date, the death penalty had been primarily addressed in relation to the right to life. In spite of some decisions finding for example detention on death row or certain execution methods to constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, the jurisprudence of international human rights monitoring bodies had never arrived at the conclusion that capital punishment per se violated the prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. The Special Rapporteur recommended that the Human Rights Council follow the call of the General Assembly to continue the work of the Commission on Human Rights in respect of the question of the death penalty and request a more comprehensive legal study on the compatibility of the death penalty with the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment under present human rights law. A number of human rights had also been affected by how drug control policies were currently shaped, both at the international and national levels. The Special Rapporteur was concerned that in many countries, persons accused or convicted of drug-related crimes were subject to the death penalty and various forms of discriminatory treatment in places of detention. The Special Rapporteur had made a number of recommendations with a view to ensuring that international human rights norms were fully incorporated into States' legal frameworks governing drug dependence treatment and rehabilitation services.

SANTIAGO CORCUERA CABEZUT, Chairman-Rapporteur of the Working Group on enforced and involuntary disappearances, said that established by the Commission on Human Rights in 1980, the Working Group was the first United Nations human rights thematic mechanism with a global mandate. Since its creation, the Working Group had transmitted over 50,000 individual cases to Governments in all regions of the world. Over the past five years, the Working Group clarified the fate or whereabouts of over 1,700 disappeared persons. In 2008, the Working Group transmitted 1,203 new cases of enforced and involuntary disappearances to Government of 28 countries, 83 of these cases allegedly occurred during the reporting period. During this period, the Working Group also clarified 54 cases in 38 countries. Compared with the data of 2007, the Working Group had doubled its volume of work both in terms of number of cases processed and the number of communications sent to Governments.

The Working Group was initially created to address the legacy of disappearances arising from authoritarian rule in Latin America. However, disappearances were currently a global problem. Today, they occurred in States suffering from internal conflict, such as Colombia, the Philippines, the Russian Federation and Sri Lanka. In other countries, such as Algeria, Argentina, Chile, some countries in Central America, Iraq, Nepal and Peru, thousands of cases of disappearances remained unsolved and consequently, they were continuous crimes. The Working Group drew the attention of the Council to the underreporting and disappearance cases in all regions of the world but with particular emphasis in Africa.

The Working Group noted five major areas of concern: The first referred to measures taken by Member States to address terrorism that may relate to or even amount to enforced disappearances. These included the enactment of legislation that restricted personal freedoms and weakened due process, random arrests committed during military operations, arbitrary detention and extraordinary renditions, which amounted to enforced disappearances. Secondly, the Working Group continued to be concerned that very few States had taken specific measures under criminal law to define enforced disappearances as a separate criminal offence and to bring their existing legislation in line with the Declaration. Third, the Working Group was concerned that in too many countries persons who had the right to denounce cases of enforced disappearances to a competent and independent authority, still could not have their complaint promptly, thoroughly, and impartially investigated. Fourth, the question of disappearances had a special resonance with women. The serious economic hardships which usually accompanied disappearances were most often borne by them. When women became victims of enforced and involuntary disappearances, they became particularly vulnerable to sexual and other forms of violence. Fifth, the Working Group emphasized the right to truth, which should be enjoyed by all victims of enforced disappearance.


Statement by a Concerned Country

JAVIER GARRIGUES (Spain), speaking as a concerned country on the report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism, said Spain had carefully read and examined the report of the Special Rapporteur on countering terrorism. The report’s noteworthy acknowledgment of the role that Spain played in the international community with regard to countering terrorism was welcomed. The Spanish Government also welcomed the acknowledgment made in the report of their responsibility and support of the police authorities to find the terrorists responsible for the Madrid attack. Spain amply demonstrated its commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms specifically with regard to countering terrorism. In Spain terrorism was considered to be a crime within the framework of the criminal code. Counter terrorism was carried out within the law and within the framework of the law, with the action of independent and impartial judges. Legislation on human rights had not been changed in seeking democratic normalcy in the country.

Spain regretted the fact despite the intensive dialogue some of the assessments in the report did not illustrate the facts regarding counter-terrorism in Spain. The Special Rapporteur ignored firm statements made by high-level officials, which diminished the rigour and creditability of his report. Without providing valid justifiable alternatives, the Special Rapporteur relied only on his opinion, stressed Spain. For those reasons and others Spain could not share the opinions of the Special Rapporteur. The centralization of criminal trials was a criminal policy option. With regard to the Chechen individual who had been extradited to the Russian Federation, Spain said that possibly through the mechanisms of the United Nations, whether through treaty bodies or through the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, efforts could be taken to allow for effective judicial cooperation without recourse in future. Given the aforementioned statement, Spain took note of the statement made by the Special Rapporteur, and was committed to continue dialogue in refining the protections and guarantees provided for human rights.