HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL DISCUSSES HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATIONS THAT REQUIRE ITS ATTENTION

The Human Rights Council this afternoon took up its agenda item on human rights situations that require the attention of the Council, hearing from a series of States and non-governmental organizations of violations of human rights in countries all over the world. It also heard presentations of reports from the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee, the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and the Forum on Minority Issues. At the beginning of the meeting, the Council concluded its debate on the follow-up to the Special Session of the Council on the human rights situation in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The following delegations took the floor in the general debate on issues that require the attention of the Council: Czech Republic on behalf of the European Union, France, Japan, Netherlands, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, China, United Kingdom, Sweden, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, United States, Iran, Algeria, Israel and Morocco. The following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, World Organization against Torture, in a joint statement with International Federation of ACAT (Action By Christians for the Abolition of Torture) and Franciscans International, International Commission of Jurists, International Federation of Human Rights Leagues, Conectas Direitos Humanos, in a joint statement with Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (Forum-Asia); and Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, Asian Legal Resource Centre, Amnesty International, Union of Arab Jurists, Europe-Third World Centre, in a joint statement with Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples; International Association of Democratic Lawyers; Women's International League for Peace and Freedom; and Foodfirst Information and Action Network (FIAN), Human Rights Watch, Indian Council of South America, Baha'i International Community, United Nations Watch, International Commission of Jurists, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, France Libertés – Fondation Danielle Mitterrand, International Federation of Human Rights Leagues (FIDH), Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (Forum-Asia), in a joint statement with Asian Legal Resource Centre, Asian Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Network, International Federation of ACAT (Action By Christians for the Abolition of Torture), and the International Organization for the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (EAFORD).

Miguel Alfonso Martinez, Chairperson of the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee, said the Committee had carried forward its investigatory and drafting work on some of the issues given to it by the Council. The new report contained a description of the work done by the working groups and the text of the resolutions adopted by the Committee, five of which required consideration by the Council. In its first year, the Advisory Committee had consolidated the practice of working as a think tank, analysing issues and discussing them from differing cultural points of view, and it should thus be seen as a new entity – it was not merely a copy of the previous Sub-Commission, although the contributions of that body should not be ignored.

John Bernhard Henriksen, Chairperson of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, said the first session of the Expert Mechanism was a historic moment representing the start of a new phase in the promotion and protection of indigenous peoples’ rights. The thematic focus at the first session, was twofold: to assist the Preparatory Committee of the Durban Review Conference by undertaking a review and submitting recommendations as contributions to the outcome of the Durban Review Conference; and to prepare a study on lessons learned and challenges to achieve the implementation of the right of indigenous peoples to education, to be concluded by 2009.

Gay McDougall, Independent Expert on Minority Issues, in her presentation of the report on the thematic recommendations of the Forum on Minority Issues, said the Forum was established to provide a platform for promoting dialogue and cooperation on issues pertaining to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, as well as thematic contributions and expertise to the work of her mandate as the Independent Expert on minority issues. Education was a fundamental human right of every man, women and child, yet, in all regions of the world minority children suffered disproportionately from unequal access to quality education. Failure to ensure equal opportunities and equal access to education robbed people of their full human potential and their ability to contribute fully to their own communities and to the wider society.

In the debate on the follow-up to the Special Session of the Council on the human rights situation in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, non-governmental organizations said, among other things, that State security forces continued to be responsible for grave violations of human rights, and still posed a serious threat to civilians as did the armed groups. The national justice system remained under-resourced, not independent, and inaccessible to the majority of the population and dominated by the military judiciary and was currently not fit to ensure impartial accountability and redress for human rights violations. The Council was urged to create a country mandate on the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The non-governmental organizations Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, World Organization Against Torture, International Commission of Jurists, and the International Federation of Human Rights Leagues, spoke on the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Speaking in a right of reply following consideration of the agenda item on human rights situations that require the attention of the Council were the delegations of Sudan, Japan, Sri Lanka, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Algeria, Cuba, Thailand, Iran, China, Cameroon, France, Morocco and the Russian Federation.


When the Council meets at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 18 March, it will begin to consider Universal Periodic Review reports, which it will be dealing with until the end of the week, taking up the reports of Botswana, Bahamas and Burundi. On Monday, 23 March, the Council will continue to hear States wishing to speak in right of reply on human rights situations that require the Council’s attention.


Continuation of Discussion on the Follow-Up to the Eighth Special Session on the Situation of Human Rights in the East of the Democratic Republic of the Congo

JULIE DE RIVERO, of Human Rights Watch, said the human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo had deteriorated gravely since the Council called for an urgent Special Session last December, as had the situation in the north east of the country. The Council should take up the recommendations made by the seven Experts and discuss and monitor the recommendations and their implementation in a way that would support consistent follow-up. The Government was brutally restricting democratic space. Given the overall situation, the Council should create a country mandate on the Democratic Republic of the Congo, with timely and adequate reporting to the Council, focusing on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, the situation of violence against women and on repression of peaceful dissent, including attacks against human rights defenders and the right to freedom of expression in the country. The situation in the country required the sustained commitment of the Council.

PETER SPLINTER, of Amnesty International, said that Amnesty International welcomed the recommendations made by the experts for multilateral technical assistance that the Democratic Republic of the Congo needed in order to develop its capacity to meet its human rights obligations. A major obstacle to progress had been the absence of clear political engagement by the Democratic Republic of the Congo to protect its citizens, ensure respect for human rights and end impunity. Essential programmes of institutional reform in this direction remained largely unimplemented. State security forces continued to be responsible for grave violations of human rights, and still posed a serious threat to civilians as did the armed groups. The national justice system remained under-resourced, not independent, and inaccessible to the majority of the population and dominated by the military judiciary. It was currently not fit to ensure impartial accountability and redress for human rights violations.

FRIDDIN AMBOUGO, of World Organization against Torture, in a joint statement with International Federation of ACAT (Action By Christians for the Abolition of Torture) and Franciscans International, welcomed the joint report of the seven thematic Special Procedures on the human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and called upon the Human Rights Council to follow-up on the recommendations of the report. The World Organization against Torture also called on the Council to respond to establishing a permanent Special Procedure on the human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which would address the crisis in a crosscutting and comprehensive way. The World Organization against Torture further called on the Human Rights Council to put an end to child soldiers in the country, and to shed light on the many grave human rights violations taking place in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

LUKAS MACHON, of International Commission of Jurists, said a lack of respect for international law, including human rights law and international humanitarian law, continued to fuel armed conflicts, and remained a major source of long-standing human rights and humanitarian challenges in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It was imperative for the Council to urge all parties to the conflict to ensure protection of civilians from assaults and threats of violence, and to respect international law. In order to bring to justice State agents who committed human rights violations, the Government should expand its judicial and security sector reforms. The Council should re-establish a comprehensive mandate to help the Government prevent vicious violence and boost full implementation of human rights standards and their integration throughout the peace process.

JULIE GROMELLON, of International Federation of Human Rights Leagues, expressed their concern about the massive violation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the climate of impunity. In the second half of 2008, North Kivu was again the scene for combat between the National Congress for the Defense of the People and the armed forces for the Democratic Republic of the Congo, supported by the Mai Mai. Given the situation, the United Nations Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUC) was unable to react, incapable in particular to protect civilians. The International Federation of Human Rights Leagues called, inter alia, for a reinforcement of MONUC and the integration of all dissident groups into the national army in order to reach durable peace.

WALTER KALIN, Representative of the Secretary-General on internally displaced persons, responding to questions raised by speakers on the follow-up to the Special Session of the Council on the human rights situation in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, thanked everyone who took the floor for their constructive statements, and he would share them with his colleagues who were unable to be here today. As was seen through the report, the group of Special Procedures did acknowledge the progress made by the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, however, they felt that the situation remained volatile, and measures taken were insufficient.

Looking at the issue of violence against women, Mr. Kalin noted that less than 1 per cent of cases of rape were investigated and brought to justice. With regard to the establishment of the Women’s Council or the Agency to Combat Violence Against Women, Mr. Kalin noted that those were good steps taken by the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, but those measures would not see their full effectiveness until they were fully operational. In addition he stressed that those measures would continue to be undermined by rampant impunity. The human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was a very complex situation, stressed Mr. Kalin. However, he noted that there seemed to be a consensus on the establishment of a follow-up mechanism, which was welcomed. The main areas had been identified in the report for the necessary technical assistance, and this was one main reason why the follow-up mechanism was necessary.

Food and education were not looked at, despite being priority areas. Similarly, the Special Procedures were unable to look at displacement, as forced and involuntary disappearances were not covered in their mandate. Those issues, among others, were important and should be included in a follow-up mechanism, once established. The group of Special Procedures was ready to continue, but proposed that an Independent Expert was better suited to continue this work, for one direct contact between the Government and the UN alike. Mr. Kalin observed that there were a number of different opinions as to what progress had been made, and that was exactly why there was a need for a follow-up mechanism.

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

TOMAS HUSAK, (Czech Republic), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the European Union was deeply concerned about the situation in Myanmar. The political process in the country was neither transparent, inclusive, free, nor fair. The humanitarian situation had deteriorated, resulting in recent months in the migration of thousands of people who had fled the human rights abuses and severe economic deprivation. There should be immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners and detainees, and the lifting of the restrictions on political parties. The broad range of systematic and widespread human rights violations in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea required the Council's urgent attention. The overall oppressive human rights situation in Eritrea was of great concern. The progress on economic and social rights made by China was encouraging, however, there was concern about measures taken against those who wished to express their views peacefully. The High Commissioner should brief the Council on the evolving human rights situation in Sri Lanka.

CHRISTOPHE GUILHOU (France) said that France remained concerned about the situation in Sudan, particularly in Darfur. Right now, the fate of four million people depended on the continuation of humanitarian operations. The Government had the obligation to allow the continuation of humanitarian aid, regardless of political considerations. France called on the Government of Sudan to go back on its decision to expel 13 humanitarian organizations. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Government was making efforts to put an end to the illegal activities of armed groups. However, the situation remained a matter of concern. Women and children were the first victims and putting an end to impunity was essential for durable peace. The situation in Sri Lanka was also alarming. France was particularly concerned by the dramatic situation of the persons held in the conflict zone. Everything had to be put in place in order to protect those civilians.

SHINICHI KITAJIMA (Japan) said regarding the situation in Sri Lanka, Japan was concerned about the serious damages and casualties surrounding internally displaced persons and other civilians in the north of the country. In order to resolve the ethnic conflict, it was of paramount importance that the political process be pursued. Regarding Cambodia, Japan appreciated the sincere efforts of the Cambodian Government. Japan would continue to engage itself in the dialogue with the Government and to extend its assistance to the Khmer Rouge trial, and training of legal professions.

On the situation in Sudan, regardless of the recent decision of the International Criminal Court, Japan urged the Sudanese Government as well as anti-Government forces in Sudan to refrain from any actions that had negative effects on the peace process and the humanitarian and security situation. Japan called on the Government of Sudan to reconsider its decision to expel 13 international non-governmental organizations from the country, and to ensure the safety of all the humanitarian workers.

BOUDEWIJN J. VAN EENENNAAM (Netherlands) said on Sudan, the Netherlands called upon the Government to reconsider the decisions to expel 13 international humanitarian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and revoke the licenses of three local NGOs, and to ensure that humanitarian assistance to the most vulnerable be continuously guaranteed, guided by the principles of human rights and international humanitarian law. There was also deep concern for the situation in Sri Lanka. Women and children continued to be victims of sexual violence on a large scale in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. There were violations against religious minorities in Iran, in particular against the Bahai community. Over the past year, the human rights situation in Somalia had deteriorated markedly. The Government of Kenya should launch an independent investigation into the killings of two human rights defenders and take measures to prevent further deterioration of the human rights situation.

TERRY CORMIER (Canada) said that the deeply troubling situation of human rights in Sudan underscored the importance that it remain under the active consideration of this Council. Human rights violations and resulting suffering, including sexual and gender-based violence, continued without pause in Sudan. Outbreaks of violence in transitional areas, such as Malakal, highlighted the fragility of the North-South peace agreement, while in Darfur, millions had been displaced by fighting and 4.7 million people received humanitarian assistance. Canada was dismayed by Sudan’s decision to expel non-governmental organizations instrumental in the delivery of this vital aid and urged the Government of Sudan to reverse this decision. The human rights situation in Sri Lanka continued to deteriorate with the intensification of the civil conflict. There had been politically-motivated killings by paramilitary forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), violent attacks on journalists, enforced disappearances, restrictions of freedom of movement and arbitrary arrests in Sri Lanka. Canada called on Sri Lanka to respect the human rights of internally displaced persons consistent with the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement.

MURIEL BERSET (Switzerland) said the tenth session of the Council gave them the opportunity to address many human rights situations both through the reports of Special Procedures, reports of the High Commissioner, different agenda items and the different reports examined in the context of the Universal Periodic Review. There were reports on certain situations for example in Afghanistan, Angola, Argentina, Canada and the United Kingdom. The Council needed to come up with new mechanisms to deal with situations that arose and required the attention of the Council.

Switzerland expressed concern over Sudan, and deplored the decision of the Sudanese authorities to expel a large number of humanitarian workers. Switzerland was alarmed over the humanitarian and security situation of millions of people in the country, and recalled that the work of those humanitarian workers was required for the survival of those civilians. Switzerland called on Sudan to respect international law, and to provide swift and unhindered humanitarian assistance to its citizens. The issue of internally displaced persons in Sri Lanka was also of great concern to Switzerland as the situation was worsening. As a result, Switzerland appealed to all parties in the conflict to respect international law, on proportionality, among other things. Switzerland also recalled the responsibility incumbent to the Sri Lankan authorities to prevent and punish forced executions, forced disappearances, and appealed for an immediate halt of all hostilities and work towards lasting peace.

KONRAD SCHARINGER (Germany) said there was an urgent need for Sudan to reconsider the expulsion of 13 non-governmental organizations from Sudan, as it was in their interest for them to remain and alleviate the situation of human rights. There was also serious concern for the situation of human rights in Myanmar, and the Government and the people should engage in a serious process of national reconciliation, with the release of all political prisoners in order to give credibility to the multi-party elections planned for 2010. The authorities should work closely with the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar, by implementing his recommendations. The human rights situation in Sri Lanka was deplored - violations were committed by both sides to the conflict. The Government should fully respect its human rights obligations, and the LTTE should observe human rights standards. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, there was a certain stabilisation in the Kivu region and many refugees had been able to go home, however, the human rights situation remained precarious, especially for the most vulnerable, namely women, children, and the sick. A mandate should be established by consensus and in close cooperation with the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

QIAN BO (China) said that this agenda item was one of the major agenda items of the Human Rights Council. The Council’s Members had to always remember this and implement the recommendations of the Council. The purpose of the Council was to respect the diversity and religious backgrounds of all regions. The principles of cooperation and dialogue should be at the core of the Council’s actions, it should also eliminate double standards and politicization. At present, the world was facing an economic and financial crisis, a food crisis, and climate change. In this context, cooperation was universally recognized to be to most important means. China emphasized that the Council must by all means avoid politicization.

MELANIE HOPKINS (United Kingdom) said the United Kingdom remained concerned about the deteriorating human rights situation in Burma, widespread and systematic human rights violations in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The United Kingdom welcomed the interactive dialogues held on those situations.

The United Kingdom was concerned about the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. The United Kingdom welcomed the progress made in some areas, in particular to tackle the recruitment of child soldiers and the political commitment by the TMVP to disarm. But they said there were still credible reports of widespread human rights violations, including disappearances, extortion, extra-judicial killings and attacks and intimidation against the media. The murder in January of the Chief Editor of the Sunday Leader was a particular concern. The United Kingdom remained deeply troubled by continued human rights violations in Zimbabwe: the suppression of free speech, the abduction and detention of political prisoners and the recent increase in attacks on farm owners and workers.

HANS DAHLGREN (Sweden) said for situations that benefited from dedicated and continued attention, there were the country-specific mandates - by working to discontinue these, some States could conclude that they shielded the interests of individual States - they would not, as violations of human rights undermined security and development. The result would only be to have taken away protection of the human rights of individuals. The confidential complaints mechanism would continue to be a crucial mechanism for allowing individuals and groups of individuals to bring situations of concern to the Council's attention. The first session of the Universal Periodic Review had shown a potential for addressing human rights issues in all countries in a comprehensive manner. For the Universal Periodic Review to succeed, it should be both open, critical and forward looking.

JANG IL HUN (Democratic Republic of Korea) said that first and foremost, human rights should be firmly guaranteed by national sovereignty. War and armed conflicts in various parts of the world were main factors that ruthlessly violated human rights. The most serious human rights violation was an act of war against sovereign States staged under the signboard of “human rights protection”. The United States-led war in Iraq and Afghanistan under the disguise of the “war on terror” had already deprived several hundreds of thousands of people of their lives and even now many innocent people were killed mercilessly everyday. Still vivid in the Democratic Republic of Korea’s memory was the tragedy of the twenty-first century that several hundreds with empty hands and naked fists, including women and children, who were murdered by the Israeli military attack on Gaza under the patronage of the United States. All these facts demonstrated that the human rights that were not guaranteed by national sovereignty were nothing but fiction and that there could be no human rights without national rights.

MICHEAL TIERNEY (Ireland) said the people of Darfur continued to wait in vain for a return to stability and peace. Those responsible for the grave crimes committed in this region needed to be held accountable – no matter who they were – and Ireland supported the work of the International Criminal Court in this regard. Ireland strongly condemned the recent expulsion of humanitarian organizations from Sudan, and urged the Government of Sudan to reverse this decision, in the interests of its own citizens’ well being.

Ireland welcomed the recent power-sharing agreement in Zimbabwe, but remained deeply concerned by issues such as the situation of political prisoners who had not yet been freed, and the appalling conditions in many of Zimbabwe’s prisons. In relation to the conflicts in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and in Somalia, Ireland called on all parties to respect the human rights and humanitarian needs of civilians. Ireland continued to be concerned about the critical human rights issues in Iran, including the suppression of the media, non-governmental organizations, trade unions, women’s groups and human rights defenders. Ireland was deeply concerned by the recent conflict in Gaza, especially its heavy impact on innocent civilians.

CAROLINE MILLAR (Australia) said Australia was deeply concerned about the human rights situation in Iran, in particular the situation of religious minorities and trade union leaders. Iran should cease abhorrent practices and adhere to international human rights obligations. Up to 200,000 civilians continued to be caught up in the conflict zone in Northern Sri Lanka - long-term political stability would only be achieved through a political solution that met the needs of all. There should be unrestricted access of the aid agencies to Darfur. Ongoing human rights abuses were taking place in Fiji, perpetrated by the Government. The Fiji Government should take clear and credible steps to return to democracy. Australia was gravely concerned by the ongoing economic, political and humanitarian catastrophe in Zimbabwe, where all parties should respect human rights.

WENDY HINTON (New Zealand) said that New Zealand valued the open and cooperative engagement on human rights situations in the Council, including on sensitive matters, as a means of facilitating concrete improvements in the universal respect for human rights. The Universal Periodic Review was one of the tools at the Council’s disposal to consider the respect for human rights in particular situations. Serious and urgent situations would continue to require attention by both the Council and the Third Committee of the General Assembly because such consideration could, if done constructively, contribute to achieving progress in the fulfilment of human rights on the ground. New Zealand noted that while the recent formation of a new unity Government in Zimbabwe represented a major shift in the political situation in the country there remained continued instances of human rights breaches by State security forces. New Zealand urged the Human Rights Council to monitor the situation closely in Zimbabwe to ensure that the new unity government met concrete benchmarks around the protection of human rights.

MARK STORELLA (United States) noted the importance that the Government of the United States attached to the international community in addressing critical human rights situations. The United States remained deeply concerned about the plight of prisoners of conscience. There were still far too many examples around the world of Governments using detention, arrest and imprisonment to prevent people from exercising their universal rights, including the fundamental freedoms of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and religion. In Zimbabwe, President Mugabe and his supporters continued to disrupt peaceful gatherings and harass and detain civil society activities and opposition political figures, despite the recent power-sharing agreement. In Iran, lack of due process exacerbated the problem of arbitrary arrests and detention without charge; closure of newspapers continued as well as the detention of individual journalists. In China the Government had increased detention of dissidents, petitioners, human rights defenders, religious freedom advocates, and defense lawyers.

SEYED MOHAMMAD MIZAMANI (Iran) said in European Union Member States the situation of human rights was alarming. In the Czech Republic, there were a number of serious concerns, in particular for the Roma minority that was suffering from various forms of discrimination. In France, there were a number of serious concerns over the situation of ethnic, national and religious minorities - discrimination manifested itself in such areas as access to housing, employment and education. Iran was concerned about a series of human rights violations in the United Kingdom, including racial prejudice against ethnic minorities, asylum seekers and immigrants, as well as the deaths in custody of racial and ethnic minority groups. In Canada, there were systematic abuses and violations, including social exclusion, and blatant racial discrimination against its own aboriginal people. The United States had a very poor record on human rights both at home and abroad.

BOUALEM CHEBIHI (Algeria) said that the human rights in the Western Sahara was concerning. The situation was the result of the lack of exercise of the fundamental right of self-determination. Over the last two years, the situation had worsened. Algeria suggested that the Council take up this case and avoid any kind of politicization. Considering this situation the Council should look at what could be done in the immediate future. Algeria underlined that the vital human right of self-determination was enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

AHARON LESHNO YAAR (Israel) said that in their statement during the general segment of the tenth general session, the Government of Israel made clear that hate speech and anti-Semitism was intolerable, inside and outside of the Council. Despite this, Iran clearly used, and continued to use, this forum to promote such toxic hatred for its own political agenda. Such politicization of human rights was at the very core of the deficiencies of this Council.

As espoused upon the General Assembly resolution 63/191 in February of this year, the human rights of the people of Iran were systematically and brutally violated. Sadly, the Iranian people were subjected to most draconic of forms of punishment, including flogging, amputations, and stoning as a method of execution. Further, there was harassment and intimidation of political opponents and human rights defenders, and the violent repression and sentencing of women exercising their peaceful right to assembly. Apostasy was punished with a mandatory sentence of death. Israel stressed that Iran was one of the greatest violators of human rights in the world and exporters of terrorism in the Middle East.

HASSANE BOUKILI (Morocco) said there was a blacklist of human rights violations in Algeria. The Human Rights Council should remember that civil and political rights had and continued to be abused in Algeria. The rights enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights were not fully incorporated into the Algerian Constitution. There were no independent investigations of the human rights violations committed on Algerian territory, and there was a total lack of information on the work of the Ad-Hoc Commission on Arbitrary Detention. In Algeria, torture, detention conditions and impunity were the daily rule. The Committee Against Torture was concerned about the large number and seriousness of the cases of torture by penal officers. Impunity was enshrined for security forces - they could not be tried or convicted, and had committed many acts of violence. There was an aggravated situation of human rights in the Tinduf camps.

OKAY MACHISA, of Conectas Direitos Humanos, in a joint statement with Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (Forum-Asia); and Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, said regarding the human rights situation in Zimbabwe that the recently constituted Government in Zimbabwe was a good sign. However, it should be considered as a transitional Government, since it did not reflect the will of the people as was shown in the election. The organizations urged the Human Rights Council to discuss the human rights situation in Zimbabwe. They also called on Zimbabwe to accept the visit of several Special Rapporteurs that had made this request. Civil society in Zimbabwe would continue monitoring the human rights situation in the country.

MICHAEL ANTHONY, of Asian Legal Resource Centre, welcomed the announcement that the Chief Justice had been restored in Pakistan. They hoped that the restored judiciary would exhibit its independence and begin to address the plethora of ongoing human rights violations in the country, notably the hundreds of forced disappearances in Balochistan and other provinces and the endemic use of torture, including that taking place in at least 52 army-run torture centres. The Asian Legal Resource Centre urged an immediate judicial inquiry into reports of women being arrested, disappeared and used as sex slaves by the army in Pakistan.

PETER SPLINTER, of Amnesty International, said recently the human rights situation in Iran had worsened, with reports of arbitrary arrests and other repressive measures taken against hundreds of individuals, mostly on account of their political or social dissent. The Iranian authorities appeared to be seeking to avoid first-hand scrutiny of the human rights situation by failing to implement long-standing visit invitations to United Nations human rights mechanisms. The Council had heard about, but not discussed sufficiently the dire human rights situation in Tibet. Amnesty also welcomed a number of early moves taken by the Obama Administration on detentions and interrogations, including substantial steps towards ending the use of secret detention and torture, and committing the Government to closing the Guantanamo detention facility.

ELIAS KHOURI, of the Union of Arab Jurists, recalled a remark made by Mr. d’Escoto Brockmann, the President of the General Assembly, who had said that it was important to place the situation in Iraq on the agenda of the Human Rights Council. The killing of over a million Iraqis and the displacement of over 5 million, as well as the pollution of the environment and attacks on minorities were gross violations of human rights. Those violations required the Council to place Iraq on its agenda and appoint a Special Rapporteur. Further, the arrest warrant against the President of Sudan was a dangerous precedent. Instead, a higher priority should be put on the prosecution of the perpetrators of human rights violations in Gaza and Palestine.

MALIK OZDEN, of Europe-Third World Centre, in a joint statement with Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples; International Association of Democratic Lawyers; Women's International League for Peace and Freedom; and Foodfirst Information and Action Network (FIAN), said they were alarmed over the systematic violations of human rights in Turkey, where 45 prisoners had died in detention and hundreds of people were being persecuted for insulting the Government. Today in Turkey over 250 children between the ages of 12 and 15 remained in pre-trial detention, with possible sentences spanning over 40 years for having thrown stones at law enforcement forces. The Human Rights Council had to look for ways and means to implement the recommendations of Special Procedures mandate holders on the situation in Turkey.

JULIE DE RIVERO, of Human Rights Watch, said the statement of the High Commissioner on Sri Lanka was a call for the Council to take decisive action to respond to the urgent needs of civilians trapped in the fighting in the Vanni. What was being seen could amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity, and there should be an urgent independent investigation of what was happening. The Government should give the United Nations and other independent agencies full access to the conflict zone. In Iraq, human rights conditions remained extremely poor, despite recent security improvements. Violence against women and girls continued to be a serious problem, with members of insurgent groups and militias, soldiers and police among the perpetrators. The Human Rights Council should adopt a resolution on the human rights situation in Iraq, calling for the establishment of a mandate of a Special Rapporteur to monitor and report on the situation.

RONALD BARNES, of Indian Council of South America, said that it was vitally important that this Human Rights Council was aware of the grave violations of the right to self-determination in Alaska and also in Hawaii. The United Nations had adopted General Assembly resolution 1469, stating that the people of Alaska and Hawaii had voted to become the forty-ninth and fiftieth states, respectively. The Indian Council challenged the Council to justify this in a study on the right to self-determination, or was politicization and selectivity the order of the day? The United States continued to deprive indigenous peoples of their property and resources, and the situation of the right to self-determination of both north and south America needed to be addressed.

DIANE ALA'I, of Baha'i International Community, said that Iran’s Minister for Foreign Affairs had stated to this Council that his Government was committed to promoting and protecting “human rights for all”. The Baha’i International Community was deeply concerned about the situation within Iran’s borders, where “human rights for all” did not always include peaceful protestors, students, journalists, trade unionists, women’s rights activists, human rights defenders and non-recognized religious minorities. The human rights of Baha’is in Iran were more abused today than at anytime since the 1980’s. Waves of violence had terrorized over 300,000 Iranian citizens because of their faith.

MARISSA CRAMER, of United Nations Watch, said there was a country whose human rights record each year ranked among the worst of the worst. That was Libya, although many would have the international community believe the opposite, even at the United Nations. Libya was not the world's leading light in truth, justice and equality – even though it claimed to be a great protector and promoter of human rights. It mistreated its 2 million black African migrants, whose lives were often dangerous, difficult, and a dead end, and they were viewed as animals by the Libyans. Libya was not a model.

LUKAS MACHON, of International Commission of Jurists, said that the Council should break its silence and address the situation in Zimbabwe. The new Government had to immediately release opponents and human rights defenders. Transition to democracy required the drafting of a new Constitution. In Sri Lanka, many civilians had been exposed to unlawful killings and other human rights violations. There was an eminent need to analyse that situation through a fact-finding mission. The High Commissioner should also seek a visit to Tibet to assess the situation there.

ZIAD ABDEL, of Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, said it was an honour to speak today for personal rights. On freedom of expression and opinion, that right was being suppressed in many countries in the Middle East. Journalists and writers were being targeted via security summons and disappearances. An Egyptian blogger was detained because he criticized a company. Libya, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia were among the most oppressive of countries in the region with respect to freedom of expression and opinion. Last year alone hundreds of authors, journalists and bloggers were put on trial for criticizing corruption in Egypt alone. The Cairo Institute called on the Governments in the Middle East to ensure freedom of expression and opinion, as those freedoms were an important step to build democracy in the region.

Ms. DI POGGIO, of France Libertés – Fondation Danielle Mitterrand, said attention should be drawn to two situations. Regarding Sri Lanka, a failure by the Council to undertake urgent action would be tantamount to allowing the genocide of the Tamil people. The Council should insist on a resolution of the conflict, guaranteeing the full human rights of the Tamils, including their right to choose their future. Secondly, since 2006, the item on self-determination was no longer on the agenda, but there were situations where serious human rights violations resulted from the denial of that right, for example in the Western Sahara, which was a leading example of unsuccessful and incomplete decolonization, with de facto occupation and the concomitant violations of the Sahrawis. The United Nations Mission to the area should be expanded in order to allow for monitoring and the protection of the rights of the people.

JULIE GROMELLON, of International Federation of Human Rights Leagues (FIDH), was extremely concerned by the pattern of systematic human rights violations in Iran. That poor record was confirmed in all fields, in particular the situation of human rights defenders, the repression against Kurdish and Baha’i minorities and the use of the death penalty. The Federation welcomed the issuance of an arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court for the Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir. The Federation considered that the Prosecutor’s decision was significant because it confirmed the hypothesis according to which the whole state apparatus had been involved in the commission of crimes in Darfur.

GEORGE SIGAMONY, of Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (Forum-Asia), in a joint statement with Asian Legal Resource Centre, called for urgent action of the Human Rights Council on the human rights catastrophe in Sri Lanka. The grave concern of the international community was not only limited to the current situation of civilians in northern Sri Lanka. The core problems of discrimination and impunity had been allowed to go unabated throughout the country in the past years. The world had witnessed a sharp increase of the un-investigated killings and disappearances against human rights defenders and prominent religious personalities there.

TESHI CHOEPHEL, of Asian Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Network, said the Council's attention should be drawn to the growing number of urgent appeals sent to China by the United Nations Special Procedures, in particular the Special Rapporteur against Torture following the crackdown in March last year. As Tibet celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the independent uprising, the fate of many caught up in last year's events were unknown. Forced disappearance was the major abuse faced by the Tibetan people, and the Working Group should intervene in that regard, and the Council should encourage the Working Group to investigate the whereabouts of the Panchen Lama.

NATHALIE JEANNIN, of International Federation of ACAT (Action By Christians for the Abolition of Torture), drew the Council’s attention to the grave human rights violations in Cameroon at the end of February 2008. At least 139 persons had lost their lives after having been shot, beaten, stoned or drowned. Some demonstrators that had been specifically targeted by the forces of law had been executed although they could have been arrested. Others had been executed although there was no riot in their proximity. It seems that this was a summary execution aimed a punishing the population or punishing some individuals in particular. The Federation wished to alert the Council to the precarious stability in Cameroon.

KAREN FRANCIS, of International Organization for the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (EAFORD), said it was with concerned dismay that the International Organization brought to the foreground an urgent human rights situation that was still not on the Council’s agenda, nor in the High Commissioner’s report. Nearly one and a half million human beings had been killed. Why was everybody here? To be politically correct? Was everybody here to listen to self-praise and lauding, when some of them were the worst perpetrators of human rights abuses? Where was the voice of the downtrodden? In spite of so many alarming reports, since the invasion, the Council had never discussed the human rights situation in Iraq nor had the High Commissioner mentioned the situation of human rights in Iraq in her report.


Documents on the Advisory Committee, the Expert Mechanism on Indigenous Peoples, the Forum on Minority Issues and the Social Forum

The Council has before it the report of the Advisory Committee on its first session (A/HRC/10/2), which contains recommendations adopted by the Advisory Committee in the areas of, inter alia, a United Nations declaration on human rights education and training; the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order; integrating the human rights of women throughout the United Nations system; the realization of the right to food; and the right of peoples to self-determination. It also provides a summary of other activities of the Advisory Committee, such as its programme of work and other organizational matters.

The report of the Advisory Committee on its second session (A/HRC/10/68) was not available.

The Council has before it the note by the Secretariat providing a progress report on a draft declaration on human rights education and training (A/HRC/10/4), says the Advisory Committee adopted recommendation 2/1 on the drafting group on human rights and training, which is included in the report of the Advisory Committee on its second session (A/HRC/10/68).

The Council has before it the report of the 2008 Social Forum (A/HRC/10/65), which contains a summary of discussions and recommendations of the 2008 Social Forum, held in Geneva from 1 to 3 September 2008. Under the main themes of poverty and human rights and the social dimension of the globalization process, the Forum heard expert presentations and held interactive debates on the following topics and their relationship to poverty: the normative framework of human rights and extreme poverty; foreign debt; international trade policies; the role and responsibility of the State, civil society and transnational corporations in poverty eradication; international assistance and cooperation in poverty reduction and eradication; decent and favourable work conditions; good governance/corruption; access to affordable essential drugs and health care; climate change; and food security, the food crisis and the right to food.

The Council has before it the report of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on its first session (A/HRC/10/56), which was held from 1 to 3 October 2008. The session was attended by the five members of the Expert Mechanism, representatives of States, United Nations bodies and specialized agencies, academics and a large number of indigenous peoples and non-governmental organizations, including participants supported by the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Populations. The Expert Mechanism held a number of discussions, including on issues related to the study on lessons learned and challenges to achieve the implementation of the rights of indigenous peoples to education, and undertook a review of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action for the purpose of submitting recommendations as contributions to the outcome of the Durban Review Conference. The Expert Mechanism also adopted five proposals for consideration and approval by the Council on its organization of work; the Durban Review Conference; the right of indigenous peoples to education; participation of indigenous peoples; and coordination with other United Nations bodies and mandates. The Expert Mechanism proposes that the Council authorize it to meet for five working days in 2009, with two additional days for preparatory meetings. It also proposes that the Council approve a two-day technical workshop/review to finalize the study on the rights of indigenous peoples to education. It further proposes that the Chairperson-Rapporteur be invited to participate in the Durban Review Conference in April 2009 and that the Chairperson-Rapporteur or other member of the Expert Mechanism be invited to the session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.

The Council has before it the report of the independent expert on minority issues, Gay McDougall (A/HRC/10/11/ Add.1), which contains the recommendations of the Forum on Minority Issues, with a particular focus on education. Among others, with regard to the learning environment, it is recommended that teacher training, including training of teachers from minority communities, should include anti-discrimination, gender sensitive and intercultural training.

Presentation of Reports on the Advisory Committee, the Expert Mechanism on Indigenous Peoples, and the Forum on Minority Issues

MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ, Chairperson of the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee, presenting the report of the Advisory Council on its second session, observed that, during the first cycle of its activities, the Advisory Committee had held its first two sessions. After the first session, Mr. Martinez had presented the results of what had been a very fruitful beginning to the work to the Council, as well as the results of the deliberations and requests made by the Human Rights Council. The Committee had made three recommendations to the Council. The second session made considerable progress in the analysis of thematic objects suggested by the Council. The Committee had carried forward its investigatory and drafting work on some of the issues given to it by the Council during its sixth, seventh and eighth sessions. The new report contained a description of the work done by the Working Group and the text of the resolutions adopted by the Committee, five of which required consideration by the Council. There had been positive elements identified with regard to a better implementation of the mandate.

The recommendations adopted in the first cycle had been brought before the Council as recommendations or decisions, for the Council to take a decision thereon. It was clear that the final decision on those declarations lay under the aegis of the Council. In all events, the Committee had acted in accordance with its establishing text. According to calculations, during the first cycle the Committee had spent a large part of its working time on analysing requests put forward specifically by the Council, and spent another smaller part on decisions arising from its own work. The Committee managed to have contact and activities between its members during the inter-sessional period, as it had been instructed to do. In its first year, it had consolidated the practice of working as a think tank, analysing issues and discussing them from differing cultural points of view, and it should thus be seen as a new entity – it was not merely a copy of the previous Sub-Commission, although the contributions of that body should not be ignored.

The Committee had sought wording that could build consensus in all its texts that it submitted to the Council. It also continued to work on promoting interaction with non-governmental organizations, which participated in the work of the Council, and would work on promoting relations with national human rights institutions. The Committee had managed to consider a large number of questions. Each of the particular decisions that had been taken, which were recommendations or suggestions to the Council could be found in the text of the report itself. The Committee had requested Mr. Martinez to raise two issues that were of concern to the Committee: the need to avoid for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights or the United Nations to organise meetings at the same time as the Advisory Committee; and for the Council to consider in future the possibility for the Committee to take its two weeks together instead of having two sessions.

JOHN B. HENRIKSEN, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, introducing the first report of the first session of the Expert Mechanism, which had been held from 1 to 3 October 2008, said that the first session had been an historic moment, representing the start of a new phase in the promotion and protection of indigenous people's rights. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted by the General Assembly in September 2007 by an overwhelming majority, was a vital instrument providing a normative framework to guide the work of the Mechanism. The thematic focus at the first session, as set by Council resolution 9/7, was twofold: to assist the Preparatory Committee of the Durban Review Conference by undertaking a review and submitting recommendations as contributions to the outcome of the Durban Review Conference; and to prepare a study on lessons learned and challenges to achieve the implementation of the right of indigenous peoples to education, to be concluded by 2009.

In addition to deliberations on those two thematic issues, the Expert Mechanism had also conducted discussions regarding the scope of its mandate, methods of work and possible future thematic areas of focus. In that context, the need for coordination and cooperation between the Expert Mechanism, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples, and the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues was reiterated by many delegations. The question of which thematic issues the Mechanism should focus on was one of the core issues discussed at the first session. That question presented many challenges as there were many equally pressing issues to address. It had been suggested that in deciding the future thematic focus of the Mechanism one should seek to identify global and cross-cutting issues of significance to indigenous peoples. In that regard, the Indigenous Caucus had proposed a number of possible thematic issues that the Mechanism should address, including the right to self-determination and the principle of free, prior and informed consent.

For the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to become an effective vehicle and process for the advancement of indigenous people's rights it was vital that it was perceived as useful for indigenous peoples and Member States alike. For that to happen, the Expert Mechanism should address issues that were truly important for indigenous peoples and communities, issues that were fundamental to their survival, dignity and well-being. It was Mr. Henriksen’s hope and belief that the future thematic focus of the Expert Mechanism would emerge naturally through a process of discussions, consultations and interaction between indigenous peoples and Governments. In addition to being a thematic subsidiary body of the Council, the Expert Mechanism also had the potential of becoming an important multilateral forum for dialogue on the rights of indigenous peoples, effectively contributing to the critical work of the Human Rights Council in the promotion and protection of all human rights.

GAY MCDOUGALL, Independent Expert on Minority Issues, presenting her report on the thematic recommendations of the Forum on Minority Issues, said the Forum had been established to provide a platform for promoting dialogue and cooperation on issues pertaining to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, as well as thematic contributions and expertise to the work of her mandate as the Independent Expert on minority issues. The mandate was responsible for guiding the work of the Forum and preparing its annual meetings, and she had been honoured to undertake that task in 2008.

Education was a fundamental human right of every man, women and child, underscored Ms. McDougall. Yet, in all regions of the world minority children suffered disproportionately from unequal access to quality education. Failure to ensure equal opportunities and equal access to education robbed people of their full human potential and their ability to contribute fully to their own communities and to the wider society. Education provided a gateway to the full enjoyment of a wide array of other rights, without which individuals and societies remained economically, socially and culturally impoverished. Lack of access to education perpetuated the cycle of poverty that was experienced most acutely by minority communities facing discrimination and exclusion. Conversely, education provided a vital key to sustainable poverty alleviation. Ensuring equal access to education was therefore one of the most serious challenges for minorities and State alike.

Equal access to education needed to be understood in the holistic sense of the rights to non-discrimination and equality. Minorities often faced systematic discrimination, which created blockages to their full enjoyment of their rights, including their right to education. To fully protect the right to education for those who had been subjected to historical systematic discrimination, one had to go beyond issues of physical or economic accessibility to focus on the ultimate goal of equal access to quality education and to equal achievement outcomes, Ms. McDougall underscored. The first Forum had been a significant success and a fitting testament to the Council’s commitment to minority issues. Over 370 individuals had been accredited from all categories to participate in the Forum, including delegates from many United Nations Member States from all regions. Approximately 90 non-governmental organizations had also been represented. Valuable insights had been provided by all participants, including experts with professional and practical experience in working to promote equality in education and in the design and delivery of education solutions to address the needs of minorities.

Ms. McDougall was delighted to report to the Council that there was an almost unprecedented degree of cooperation between the Forum and United Nations bodies and specialized agencies, in particular in regard to the constructive engagement of the treaty bodies, the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee and agencies including the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and the United Nations Children’s Fund. A set of draft recommendations had been prepared and circulated prior to the Forum. The recommendations were intended for a wide readership of not only Governments but also international organizations and agencies, civil society, all educators and those who learned from them.


Right of Reply

OMER DAHAB FADOL MOHAMED (Sudan), speaking in a right of reply, said there had been discussion of the expulsion of the 13 non-governmental organizations (NGOs), whose activities did not make up more than 3 per cent of the NGOs as a whole working in the country. The European Union was a peace partner, but had turned its back on Sudan in its search for a peaceful solution to the situation in Darfur, and had given political recognition to those opposing the Government. Many European countries were trying to abort the peace process by inciting the President of the International Criminal Tribunal against Sudan. NGOs did not have the right to provide misinformation, such as saying that 50,000 people were dying every day because of the conflict. The European Union should not want the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to rely on such information. Concerning France, it should remember what Médecins sans frontières had said during the massacres in Rwanda.

SHINICHI KITAJIMA (Japan), speaking in a right of reply, said that it was regrettable that Japan had to exercise its right of reply again because of a statement by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Japan was committed to promoting peace and the allegations that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had mentioned were completely groundless. The Universal Periodic Review was a mechanism for the protection of human rights, but the Special Rapporteur also played an important role in addressing grave and ongoing human rights situations and should be a complementary mechanism. Japan urged the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to face the human rights situation in its country and to engage in dialogue with the Human Rights Council Special Procedures.

RAJIVA WIJESINHA (Sri Lanka), speaking in a right of reply, said their statement was in response to the statements made by Japan, Australia and the United States, among others. Sri Lanka did in fact take care of its civilians. The Government of Sri Lanka intended to restore democratic process in the country after years of totalitarian rule. The Government would pursue investigations into violations against human rights in the country. Sri Lanka took note of the concern of the United States with respect to the need to train the law enforcement officials, but Sri Lanka said that that was something that many other Member States remained to implement as well. Sri Lanka stressed that it was not too late for a concerted effort. Sri Lanka said that the Human Rights Council must deal with the behaviour of State parties. Sri Lanka was concerned about the continued disappearance of children who had been recruited by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) for armed conflict, and wondered why no other Member State had made any comment about such acts, whereas the issue of family reunification was of deep concern to the Government of Sri Lanka.

JANG IL HUN (Democratic People's Republic of Korea), speaking in a right of reply, said the delegation totally resented the allegations made by the United States and the European Union, which misrepresented the human rights situation in the country. Any problems stemmed from the United States and its policy towards developing countries, which included indiscriminate torture and killings. Even basic human rights had been violated, including the right to life, thus disqualifying the United States from talking about human rights. In the United States and other Western countries there were many human rights violations, including violence against women, defamation of religion, xenophobia, and others every day. It was preposterous for these countries to criticize the human rights situation in other countries. The United States should clear up its own human rights violations. The delegation also resented the allegations made by Japan on the abduction issue, which was made to capitalize on the issue for domestic purposes, and to hide the crimes of the past. Japan should apologize for the crimes it had committed in the past to the Korean people.

BOUALEM CHEBIHI (Algeria), speaking in a right of reply, said, concerning the comments by Morocco, that the rights of the people in the Western Sahara were constantly trampled upon. Morocco had failed to come up with well-founded facts supporting its allegations. Algeria refused to enter into a bilateral process because of the recurring unjustified allegations by Morocco and reiterated its call for a United Nations fact-finding mission to the region.

JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba), speaking in a right of reply, said that they had listened with care to the statement made by the United States and had hoped to see a reflection of change in that regard, and a spirit of self-criticism, which had not happened and was quite regrettable. Cuba said that this seemed to be the old approach – to criticize others but remain silent with respect to themselves. Cuba did not take their statement very seriously.

VIJAVAT ISARABHAKDI, (Thailand), speaking in a right of reply, said, with regard to the statement made by the Asian Legal Resource Center concerning the disappearance of a human rights lawyer, Thailand was fully aware of the concern regarding this disappearance, and shared that concern, attaching the highest priority to solving that case, with the aim of giving justice to the family. Progress would be made on the case in due course, and the fact that no announcements had been made did not mean that progress was not being made. With regard to the lese-majesté law, that was a matter of domestic security, as the Royal Family were well regarded by the Thai people, who resented insults to the Royal Family and could react violently in that regard. It was not aimed at restricting rights or the human rights of human rights defenders. The Royal Thai Government supported and encouraged the work of groups within civil society to support and promote human rights and fundamental freedoms in a peaceful manner, and any allegations of misconduct by the security forces would be fully investigated.

ALI BAHREINI (Iran), speaking in a right of reply, said, with regard to the statement of Israel, that the regime of Israel was based only on repression. Regrettably, the Israeli Government continued to perpetuate massive violations of human rights. No amount of deception or smear campaigns could mask that that regime posed the biggest threat. Those were despicable tactics to distract the attention of the Council from Israeli crimes.

YAN JIRARONG (China), speaking in a right of reply, said China fully rejected the accusations of the Czech Republic and of Amnesty International. Those allegations were based on ignorance and prejudice. There were many people working for the welfare of the people in China, and in front of the law everyone was equal. On Tibet, the so-called issue of Tibet was not an issue of ethnicity and culture; it was an issue of the fight against separatism, of territory integrity and sovereignty. A year ago the incident of 14 March was an event where burning, looting and smashing of public and private property took place, and violators of the law were punished. The remarks of the United States and other delegates ran contrary to the spirit of cooperation and dialogue, and should perhaps consider being more self-critical and self-aware of the way they treated other countries.

BERTIN BIDIMA (Cameroon), speaking in a right of reply, said the delegation wished to respond to the fallacious statement read by Christians to Abolish Torture. The riots in 2008 had been due to the higher cost of living in Cameroon due to the international economic environment, and that had led to actions by the people which were responded to by the forces of order in a democratic manner. The Government had taken a number of measures to respond to the high cost of living. The members of the Government had held press conferences, calling for the rule of law and justice to prevail during those events, and had published information about loss of human life and destruction to property caused. An envoy had been sent to the Human Rights Council to explain the situation and the causes of the events. A report on the events was being finalized, as requested by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in March last year.

MARIE-ANNA LEBOVITS (France), speaking in a right of reply, said that France was targeted earlier on by an African country for its presence in Rwanda. France had intervened for purely humanitarian reasons. France added that there had been a Commission of Inquiry on the Turquoise Operation in France which had confirmed that that operation had saved hundreds of lives.


HASSANE BOUKILI (Morocco), speaking in a right of reply, said, with regard to the Sahara, that that was Moroccan territory. The discussion between Algeria and Morocco had confirmed that it was a bilateral problem. There was a strange obsession on the part of Algeria with regard to Morocco and the Sahara, and they would better spend their energy on solving their problems at home. Morocco was undergoing a process of reform, which was appreciated by the international community, and it included the Sahara. There was a worsening human rights situation in Algeria. Algeria did not live up to its international commitments, and did not ensure human rights for the population of the Tindoof camps. It was trying to torpedo United Nations efforts to find a solution to this problem and allow the Maghreb to grow economically. Despite this, Morocco was doing its best to improve the situation. Algeria was limited by a limited understanding of human rights, and they should review the relevant texts.

EVENY USTINOV (Russian Federation), speaking in a right of reply, said that the United States was using the Human Rights Council to give rebirth to selectivity. The United States was far from protecting the freedom of expression and the right to life of journalists. Thus, over the past two years many journalists had died in Iraq. There had been several cases and no one had been punished for them. Several journalists spent time in United States prisons because they had refused to hand over information. Before criticizing other States they should first put order in their own country.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC09037E