HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS GENERAL DEBATE ON THE VIENNA DECLARATION AND DIALOGUE WITH SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON RACISM

The Human Rights Council this afternoon held a general debate on the follow- up to and implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, followed by an interactive dialogue with Mutuma Ruteere, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

In the general debate, speakers stated that the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action reaffirmed the importance of ensuring the universality, objectivity and non-selectivity of human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development. The Vienna Declaration remained a framework for the renewed dialogue among members of the international community and an engagement of stakeholders both locally and regionally. Others, observing that one of the main political lessons from 2016 was that too many were excluded from the benefits of socio-economic development, urged Member States to participate in exploring the linkages between human rights and the Sustainable Development Goals. It was underscored that the current session had a particular emphasis on women’s rights; the rule of law was important in enshrining equality before the law.

Speaking were Tunisia on behalf of the African Group, Malta on behalf of the European Union, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Bahrain on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Rwanda on behalf of Chile, Denmark, Ecuador, Luxembourg, Portugal and Uruguay, United Kingdom on behalf of a group of 62 States, China, Venezuela, India, South Africa, United States, Nicaragua, Greece, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Algeria, Mozambique, Ireland, Denmark, Nepal, Namibia and Morocco.

The following non-governmental organizations and national human rights institutions also spoke: The National Human Rights Institute in Chile, Espace Afrique Internationale, Conectas Direitos Humanos, Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain, Iraqi Development Organization, in a joint statement, Al Salam Foundation, Conseil International pour le soutien à des procès équitables et aux Droits de l’Homme, Alliance Defending Freedom, Indian Council of South America, World Muslim Congress, Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik, International-Lawyers.org, International Humanist and Ethical Union, Liberation, Organisation Internationale pour le Développement Intégral de la Femme, Maarij Foundation for Peace and Development, United Nations Watch, International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations and Association for the Protection of Women and Children’s Rights, Prahar, Mbororo Social and Cultural Development Association, Indigenous People of Africa Coordinating Committee, International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Human Right Law Centre, Association pour l’Intégration et le Developpement Durable au Burundi, World Barua Organization, Association des étudiants tamouls de France, Le Pont, Association Bharathi Centre Culturel Franco-Tamoul, Tamil Uzhagam, Association Solidarité Internationale pour l’Afrique, Alliance Creative Community Project, Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des droits de l’Homme, Association of World Citizens, Conseil de jeunesse pluriculturelle, American Association of Jurists, Centre for Inquiry, International Buddhist Relief Organisation, European Humanist Federation, ANAJA L’Eternel a répondu, International Longevity Centre Global Alliance and the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development.

Venezuela, Philippines, Brazil, Chile, China, Morocco and Algeria exercised their right of reply.

Mutuma Ruteere, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, then presented his reports, including the report on the thematic work of the mandate which spanned a wide range of issues, including the phenomenon of xenophobia, its conceptualization, trends and manifestations, particularly against vulnerable groups such as migrants, refugees, asylum seekers, persons belonging to minorities and indigenous people; the phenomenon of racial profiling in law enforcement and how the implicit biases impacted on the frequency of stops and criminal sentences; and how new information technologies, such as the internet and social media, had been exploited to disseminate racist ideas, hate messages and incitement to racial hatred and violence.

Mr. Ruteere said his second report focused on combatting the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that fuelled contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other related intolerance. He also spoke about his country visits to Argentina, Australia and Fiji.

Argentina, Australia and Fiji spoke as concerned countries.

In the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance, speakers reiterated the need to tackle the conditions that spurred terrorism and stressed the fundamental importance of political will in the fight against the scourge of racism and racial discrimination. Several speakers shared deep concern about the increase of populist language and hate speech in political discourse and the alarming level of discriminatory and xenophobic narratives that portrayed migrants and refugees as a threat to national security. The increase of xenophobia and racism continued to be among most important global challenges, delegations noted, urging the international community to double its efforts to effectively address those phenomena, including through the implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.

Speaking were El Salvador on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, Tunisia on behalf of the African Group, European Union, Russia, Greece, United States, Mexico, Switzerland, Poland, Spain, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, France, Venezuela, Egypt, South Africa, Morocco, Tunisia, Kenya, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Bolivia, Iraq,
Georgia, Botswana, Council of Europe, Malaysia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Libya.

The following non-governmental organizations also spoke: Touro Law Centre, the Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust, International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism, World Jewish Congress, United Nations Watch and Minority Rights Group International.

The Council will resume its work at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, 20 June to conclude its interactive discussion with the Special Rapporteur on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance, followed by a general debate on the same issue. The Council will then hold separate interactive dialogues with the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Côte d’Ivoire and the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, followed by its annual discussion on technical assistance and capacity building.

General Debate on the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action

Tunisia, speaking on behalf of the African Group, stressed that the Council was bound to implement civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights as well as the right to development equally. The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development upheld the intrinsic connection between all rights and development. Ensuring complementarity between international, regional and national mechanisms was key.

Malta, speaking on behalf of the European Union, stated that, with the adoption of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, all States had reaffirmed that human rights were universal, indivisible and interdependent. The European Union attached great importance to this principle but was concerned that it was sometimes misunderstood. The European Union stressed that States had the responsibility to ensure protection from violence for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons.

Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, stated that the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action reaffirmed the importance of ensuring the universality, objectivity and non-selectivity of human rights. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation believed that positive and constructive engagement, free from politicization and double standards, was the only way forward in the field of human rights.

Bahrain, speaking on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council, said the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action was a framework for the renewed dialogue among members of the international community and an engagement of stakeholders both locally and regionally. All but one country had ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child and all should cooperate to promote human rights based on non-politicization. The Gulf Cooperation Council countries condemned all utilization of the Human Rights Council for narrow political interests, and called on the international community to respect human rights and preserve the mission of the Council.

Rwanda, speaking on behalf of Chile, Denmark, Ecuador, Luxembourg, Portugal and Uruguay, said one of the main political lessons from 2016 was that too many were excluded from the benefits of socio-economic development. Next week, on June 29, the Group of Friends on Human Rights and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development would convene a meeting to explore what the linkages were between human rights and the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. Those questions needed to be framed to move forward on concrete actions in support of the implementation of the Agenda.

United Kingdom, speaking on behalf of a group of 62 States, said the rule of law was a principle of governance in which all persons were accountable to laws which were independently adjudicated, which reinforced international human rights obligations. The rule of law had a role in preventing violence and in the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals as well as in protecting human rights. The current session had a particular emphasis on women’s rights; the rule of law was important in enshrining equality before the law.
China stated that the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action had played a major role in the advancement of human rights. The right to development was a critical right, and developing countries should prioritize development according to their own priorities and local contexts. Countries should cooperate and respect the road to development chosen by the people in light of their own needs.

Venezuela reminded that the pillars of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development were to be found in human rights principles, namely non-discrimination, inclusion, equality and human dignity. The economic and capitalist global crises and conflicts caused by the interventionism of certain countries had led millions of people into a position of extreme vulnerability. Extreme poverty and social exclusion continued to threaten human dignity.

India said that any follow-up to the Vienna Declaration should avoid the perceptions of selectivity, politicization and double standards. The effective realization of human rights was intrinsically linked to the rule of law, democracy and the progressive development of the concerned State. The Declaration supported the right of each State to choose the framework suited for it. Unfortunately, in clear violation of its letter and spirit, there were attempts to establish yet more external and intrusive mechanisms.

South Africa recalled that, as affirmed in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, civil and political rights were inextricable, as well as economic, social and cultural rights. As the international community was implementing the 2030 Agenda, it was reminded that each goal spoke to the fulfilment of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

United States recalled that the Vienna Declaration stated that every individual had the right to freedom of thought, conscience, expression and religion and that non-governmental organizations should be free to carry out their human rights activities without interference. To promote these freedoms the United States called upon States to refrain from implementing measures which infringed upon freedoms.

Nicaragua said that the approval of the Vienna Declaration in 1993 marked a major step in the history of international law since it linked the rights enshrined in the United Nations Charter with those of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Nicaragua recalled that all people had the right to self-determination. Nicaragua was opposed to any unilateral measures that would undermine these values such as the embargo imposed by the United States against Cuba.

Greece said it strongly believed in the universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelation of human rights. Despite the financial crisis, Greece continued to strengthen the human rights protection framework, and was participating as one of the main sponsors in a series of cross regional initiatives in the Council. Greece also supported significant initiatives such as the safety of journalists.

Pakistan said the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action charted the basic principles in a balanced manner guaranteeing national ownership of the programme for the realization of all human rights, which were indivisible and interrelated. Pakistan had taken a number of initiatives for the implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, such as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor which would enhance the energy security of the wider region.

Russian Federation said it had submitted a draft resolution on celebrating the important anniversaries, including that of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. The Russian Federation initiative sought to bring all together; promoting human rights and work to achieve the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action goals would only work if they were based on cooperation. The Russian Federation called on those who were not yet co-sponsors to join the effort.

Algeria upheld the fundamental rights of all people enshrined in the Vienna Declaration, noting that the rights of the people of Western Sahara had not been implemented. Morocco had prevented them from exercising their right to self-determination. The international community should denounce the systematic violation of the human rights of the Saharawi people. The United Nations Children’s Fund and other United Nations agencies had been permanently established in the Tindouf camps.

Mozambique reminded that the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action had classified the denial of the right to self-determination as a human right violation. The case in point was Western Sahara where people had been denied their right to self-determination. Mozambique appealed to all involved parties there to cooperate with a fact-finding mission on the human rights situation on the ground.

Ireland noted that the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action reaffirmed the importance of civil society in the protection of human rights, and it regretted the attacks on human rights defenders. It voiced concern over the discrimination against persons based on their sexual orientation and gender identity. The universality of human rights was clearly affirmed in the Vienna Declaration, and it was regrettable that some sought to undermine that principle citing cultural relativism.

Denmark recalled that, more than ever, international challenges required international solutions. The work of the Human Rights Council had never been more important. Countries in the Council must stand firm and bring progress on human rights. The rule of law was fundamental in liberal democracies and central to the realization of human rights for all.

Nepal called for the fair and equal treatment of all human rights, on the same footing and with the same emphasis, avoiding selective preference to one set of rights over the other. Nepal stressed that the right to development must be mainstreamed similar to other civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. Socio-economic development was key for sustaining and institutionalizing human rights gains.

Namibia recalled that the right to self-determination was enshrined in the Vienna Declaration. However, the people of Western Sahara were still denied this inalienable right. This was despite the 1975 legal advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the status of this territory. Namibia stood firm in its support for the people of Western Sahara.

Morocco attached importance to the continued implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. A group of States during Morocco’s Universal Periodic Review had commended the country for its achievements within the sphere of human rights. Until lasting political solutions could be found to the regional dispute, Morocco continued to make efforts toward an integrated approach to bolster rights in the Sahara region.

National Human Rights Institute in Chile drew to the attention of the Human Rights Council that its offices had been taken over by members of associations representing victims of torture and others. Since the outset, the National Human Rights Institute in Chile had urged Chile to provide adequate reparations to victims of human rights violations. While the Government was not solving their request, they would continue the total occupation of the offices, and the Government had decided not to establish a dialogue with the victims. Their requests were legitimate.

Espace Afrique Internationale appealed in favour of persons with albinism. The international day of awareness of albinism had been welcomed by persons affected by albinism. There was a need for the Human Rights Council to work even faster in ensuring the rights of persons with albinism, many of whom suffered in silence. In Senegal, there had been attacks on persons with albinism.

Conectas Direitos Humanos recalled that the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action urged all States to protect the rights of migrants and their families. Unfortunately, Brazil’s President had vetoed parts of the new legislation which protected migrants’ rights. The organization urged that the contribution of civil society be fully taken into account in the protection of migrants’ rights in Brazil.

Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain shared concern about the human rights of women in Bahrain, which discriminated against them in marriage. Cases of mistreatment had not been followed up. Women could only bring their grievances in front of the Councils of Elders, which were made up of men, and this limited their access to justice. The Council was urged to bring about equal treatment of women in Bahrain.

Iraqi Development Organization, in a joint statement, condemned the violation of the right to self-determination and Saudi Arabia’s attacks on Yemen. Coalition airstrikes had killed numerous people. It asked the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to work in conjunction with the International Committee of the Red Cross to secure the delivery of the bodies of deceased to their families, and to investigate those killings.

Alsalam Foundation voiced concerns about the repeated violations of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights in Bahrain that failed to eradicate discrimination in the workplace. Workers were discriminated against on the basis of gender, nationality, religion and origin. There was an urgent need to lead proper investigations on the case of dismissed workers in Bahrain.

Conseil International pour le Soutien a des Procès Equitables et aux Droits de l’Homme expressed serious concerns about the violations of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights by the Governments of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. Extrajudicial executions and summary detentions happened on a daily basis. Kuwait also discriminated against Shia communities. The human rights violations committed in the intervention of Saudi Arabia in Yemen was also worrisome.

Alliance Defending Freedom said that freedom of speech was key to establish a robust and long-standing democracy. Unfortunately, although the definition of freedom of speech was clear, there was no formal definition of hate speech in international law. It was urgent to implement regulation forms of communications that were not in line with the international standards on human rights.

Indian Council of South America said the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action was created to support all rights, including the right to self-determination. States had told the speaker that if he had been supported, other ambassadors would be questioned. The United States Supreme Court had said that Alaska was for the white race. In Hawaii, a person was in prison in violation of the habeas corpus principle.

World Muslim Congress underscored the importance of protecting the human rights of people under colonialization, and said the rights of the people of Kashmir were recognized by the Security Council, yet the Indian militarized state had caused people to be killed, disappeared and blinded. The criminal silence of the international community encouraged India to continue its actions. The Government of India was called on to end its military repression and create an environment for the implementation of the United Nations resolutions on Kashmir.

Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik said it was no accident that fundamentalist systems attacked women’s rights at every opportunity. The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action decided that all forms of discrimination on the grounds of sex were priority objectives of the international community. The international community needed to stop tolerating any kind of violation and discrimination against women and girls.

International-Lawyers.org drew attention to the continued harassment of Inner City Press by the United Nations at its New York headquarters due to that media’s aggressive coverage of corruption scandals involving senior United Nations officials. It also called attention to the growing number of death sentences being handed down in Egypt, and it urged Egypt to respect the measures of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

International Humanist and Ethical Union, in a joint statement with, Action Canada for Population and Development; Allied Rainbow Communities International; Federation for Women and Family Planning; International Commission of Jurists; International Lesbian and Gay Association; and International Longevity Center Global Alliance, Ltd. expressed strong concern about the draft resolution on the protection of the family, which reinforced ageist stereotypes, failed to adequately recognize older persons as individual rights holders, and failed to protect and fulfil their rights. It rejected the resolution’s limited focus on “protection and assistance” and failure to reflect research that the family was the primary site of violence against older persons.

Liberation reminded that according to the Vienna Declaration every country had to strive to eliminate discrimination on the basis of gender. In India only six women had been Supreme Court judges since 1950 and currently there was only one sitting female judge out of 28 judges. The organization requested India to involve women in peace talks, take efforts to create awareness against discriminatory traditions, and to implement a quota for female judges.

Organisation Internationale pour le Développement Intégral de la Femme voiced concern about the gross violations of women’s and children’s rights by the Polisario in Western Sahara. Organisation Internationale pour le Développement Intégral de la Femme called for the departure of the members of the Polisario from this territory. The King of Morocco Mohamed VI attached important attention to this issue.

Maarij Foundation for Peace and Development recalled that human rights and fundamental freedoms were birth rights. As such, they required that all stakeholders coordinated their efforts in order to ensure their fulfilment. Sudan had made progress in adopting effective measures and policies in order to promote human rights.

United Nations Watch recalled the case of Sun Qian, a Canadian citizen arrested in Beijing in February 2017. She was pepper sprayed in the face and eyes. In China, Falun Gong practitioners were subjected to widespread surveillance, arbitrary detention and torture. Would the United Nations turn a blind eye to such crimes against humanity.

International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations said Morocco continued to violate the right to self-determination of the people of Western Sahara and refused to accept a referendum where independence for Western Sahara was included as a possible choice in accordance with the established United Nations principles for decolonisation. It was important for the Human Rights Council to be engaged on the right to self-determination in the non-self-governing territory.

Association for the Protection of Women and Children’s Rights said Jammu and Kashmir was one state where there were massive violations of human rights. Freedom of expression and assembly were completely removed by the authorities. Hundreds had lost their eyesight permanently. The women of Kashmir were the most victimized of those atrocities. Juvenile girls were kept in police lock-up and prisons with adult criminals.

Prahar stated that in its Universal Periodic Review report India did not consider the Armed Special Powers Act, which indicated its unwillingness to review that act. In addition, the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women maintained that India should repeal that act, and consider ratification of the Convention against Torture. Prahar urged the Council to communicate to India to abide by the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action.

Mbororo Social and Cultural Development Association drew attention to rising social injustices in India, notably crimes against minorities in the State of Tripura, citing examples of crimes against women which had gone unpunished. The Government of India had failed to protect children and women from exploitation and molestation.

Indigenous People of Africa Coordinating Committee noted that the Government of India had failed to set aside budget resources for the development of women and children. There had been a marginal increase in recent years. That budgetary constraint had continued despite the relevant recommendations by the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.

International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination said the United Nations Charter and the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action recognized civil society as key for the functioning of the Human Rights Council regarding the awareness of human rights reporting. It was of paramount importance to increase operative space for non-governmental organizations. The Council was asked to take immediate steps to better engage with civil society.

Human Right Law Centre deplored that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people continued to face high levels of violence and discrimination because of who they were and loved. Discrimination and violence was a daily reality for many people in private and public life. For example, laws that criminalized same-sex activity were enforced. The Council was urged to engage in constructive dialogue on these issues.

Association pour l’Intégration et le Developpement Durable au Burundi recalled that States were responsible for eliminating all forms of discriminations against women. In India, women were excluded from decision processes and discriminated against in many fields such as economy, social and political activity. The Council was urged to communicate with India to engage in the promotion and protection of women’s rights in India, especially in the northern regions of the country.

World Barua Organization said the current situation in India was of concern. In the month of March, a women’s centre had not been opened as planned. The centre’s closure indicated the regressive attitude of the Government. The Human Rights Council was urged to communicate with India and ensure that it addressed the issue of caste discrimination.

Association des étudiants tamouls de France said only the majority community in Sri Lanka enjoyed their rights. More than 40,000 war orphans existed, and there was very little change in the reality on the ground. For every Tamil, there were six Sinhala armed soldiers. The draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act still prevailed. The Government was adamant in not allowing its armed forces to be prosecuted. It was essential for the Human Rights Council to set up a tribunal and provide justice to the Tamil people.

Le Pont said the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action promoted respect for the rights of children. Children in Sri Lanka suffered from nutritional deficiencies. The social rehabilitation remained difficult. Sri Lanka did not allow psychosocial intervention in conflict zones. Children should not be treated as prisoners.

Association Bharathi Centre Culturel Franco-Tamoul underlined the importance of the right to self-determination, noting that the Tamil people had been treated as second-class citizens in Sri Lanka. The Government had refused all agreements and had imposed a military rule on the Tamil areas, as well as forced Buddhist beliefs.

Tamil Uzhagam recalled that the Vienna Declaration reaffirmed the implementation of the Geneva Conventions, adding that the United Nations had produced three comprehensive reports on Sri Lanka. However, none of the reports’ recommendations regarding accountability for war crimes had been taken seriously by Sri Lankan governments. The current Government had been backtracking on the establishment of a hybrid court.

Association Solidarité Internationale pour l’Afrique called attention to the genocide committed against the Tamil people in Sri Lanka. It called on the Human Rights Council to urge the Sri Lankan Government to grant the Tamil people the right to self-determination, which would ensure lasting peace on the island.

Alliance Creative Community Project protested against the refusal by the Swiss authorities to deliver a visa to a Tamil citizen victim of the war in Sri Lanka to participate in the Council of Human Rights. This refusal by the Swiss authorities was based on the motives of insufficient evidence that he would go back to Sri Lanka after the session.

Rencontre Africaine pour la Défense des droits de l’Homme recalled that human rights were indivisible and should be put at the heart of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The denial of the rights of refugees and migrants was an urgent issue to tackle. Rencontre Africaine urged States that had rejected visits by Special Procedures to come out of their isolation.

Association of World Citizens called on the Government of Iran to release the scientist Hamid Reza Jamali who had been detained in Tehran since 2016 without any evidence of crime, only because he refused to agree to false accusations. Hamid Reza Jamali had been held in prison for 14 months and had held several hunger strikes.

Conseil de jeunesse pluriculturelle expressed concern at the solitary confinement of prisoners which ran counter to the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. Many prisoners suffered from chronic diseases, and they were denied visits. Solitary confinement prisoners were isolated from their wives and children.

American Association of Jurists said under item 8 of the standing agenda, the Human Rights Council had organized a high-level panel on drugs. The rights of indigenous people to use their medicine was included as a topic for discussion. That right was protected subject to international law. There should be a new report to the next Special Session of the General Assembly on drugs.

Centre for Inquiry said at least 200 million women and girls suffered from genital mutilation. It had found its way into the west, where it was being practiced by certain immigrant communities. It was unacceptable that women were forced to undergo such an inhumane procedure. Many girls did not survive the ordeal, and those who did were scarred for life. The Human Rights Council had a mandate to protect people, and the Council should make female genital mutilation an international criminal offense.

International Buddhist Relief Organisation stated that terrorists were the worst human rights violators. Sri Lanka had suffered from terrorism for almost three decades. The High Commissioner for Human Rights was immune from lawsuits because of his diplomatic immunity. But that should not be taken as an excuse to continue to belittle the Sri Lankan judiciary.

European Humanist Federation noted that despite the Vienna Declaration several European countries kept violating women’s basic rights. In Poland, Ireland and Cyprus, access to safe and legal abortion was still highly restricted, while it was completely banned in Malta. In Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia, public authorities and the media had conducted guilt campaigns against women who had chosen to terminate their pregnancy.

ANAJA L’Eternel a répondu voiced disappointment that certain civil society organizations in the Council made statements defending war criminals. The establishment of a Tamil nation would finally end the colonisation in Sri Lanka. The organization proposed that the Human Rights Council establish a mandate holder on Tamils in Sri Lanka. The people of the occupied Tamil land needed to finally exercise their right to self-determination.

International Longevity Centre Global Alliance said that the resolution on the protection of the family was against the principles enshrined in the Vienna Declaration. The family was not the foremost environment for development and diversity. Failure to acknowledge sexual violence in the realm of the family illustrated States’ failure to exert due diligence responsibility.

Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development called attention to the significance given to democracy and fair elections in the Vienna Declaration. Freedoms of expression, assembly and association were pivotal for democracy and elections. Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development drew attention to a number of Asian countries that were set to undergo important elections such as Timor-Leste, Singapore, Mongolia, Cambodia and Malaysia.


Right of Reply

Venezuela, speaking in a right of reply in response to falsehoods made by the United States, said the delegation of the United States had made groundless and unfounded accusations about supposed harassment of civil society. There were no audio or video recordings to back up those facts which only existed in the minds of that delegation. Venezuela was the representative of a humanist government, which respected the human rights of human rights defenders. The United States sowed destruction around the world and now claimed to be the global policeman in the area of human rights.

Philippines, speaking in a right of reply in response to the United States, said that it was regrettable they had forgotten information that had already been stated. There had been malicious propaganda that there were extrajudicial killings. Some 76.3 per cent had been investigated. Respect for human rights was an intrinsic part of the Philippines’ society.

Brazil, speaking in a right of reply, clarified that Brazil was a construct of migrants and that it cherished its diversity and strongly rejected all forms of racism, xenophobia and other expressions of intolerance. The legislation updated Brazil’s laws and regulations on migration in order to ensure the respect for the rights of migrants, to promote inclusion and integration, and to facilitate safe, regular and orderly migration flows. In line with the constitutional prerogative, the President had vetoed some dispositions of the law that required further discussion and elaboration.

Chile, speaking in a right of reply in response to the statement by the Chilean National Human Rights Institute, noted that progress had been made with respect to the reparations for victims of human rights violations. The Government had organized weekly meetings to that end, and it had always been open to dialogue with victims of human rights violations.

China, speaking in a right of reply, said it opposed the accusations of several non-governmental organizations on alleged human rights violations in the country. The Falun Gong was an evil cult and an anti-China movement exercising harmful psychological control on its practitioners and their families. The Falun Gong was prohibited in order to ensure the respect of human rights in the country.

Morocco, speaking in a right of reply, rejected Algeria’s declaration on Moroccan Sahara and invited Algeria to sweep in front of its own door, notably regarding the situation in Kabylia. Morocco criticised Namibia for preventing the people of Caprivi to advocate for their independence.

Algeria, speaking in a right of reply, said its position with regard to Western Sahara was in line with its policy. It was no use to count the countries, because no country recognized Morocco’s sovereignty over the territory, as it had been on the list of non-self-governing territories since 1963. The Human Rights Council had a legal and moral obligation to look into the situation. The obligation was confirmed by the fact that the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara did not have a human rights component. Algeria did not illegally occupy another territory violating international law. It would be too lengthy to describe Morocco’s underperformance wiht regard to human rights.

Documentation

The Council has before it the Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (A/HRC/35/41).

The Council has before it an addendum to the Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance - mission to Argentina (A/HRC/35/41/Add.1).

The Council has before it an addendum to the Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance - mission to Australia (A/HRC/35/41/Add.2).

The Council has before it an addendum to the Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance - mission to Fiji (A/HRC/35/41/Add.3).

The Council has before it the Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance on combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance (A/HRC/35/42).


Presentation of Reports by the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms Of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Forms of Intolerance

MUTUMA RUTEERE, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance, in his last address to the Council, presented his report on thematic work, which spanned a wide range of issues. Last year, the Special Rapporteur had focused on the phenomenon of xenophobia, its conceptualization, trends and manifestations, particularly against vulnerable groups such as migrants, refugees, asylum seekers, persons belonging to minorities and indigenous people. The report had considered the rise of political parties and movements with xenophobic platforms, as well as laws and policies glorifying historical injustices and fuelling contemporary forms of racism. The 2015 report addressed the phenomenon of racial profiling in law enforcement and discussed the implicit biases and how they impacted on the frequency stops and criminal sentences. In spite of various studies demonstrating the ineffectiveness of profiling, it continued to be a popular approach, particularly in relation to national security and immigration policy. In 2014, the Special Rapporteur had examined how new information technologies, such as the Internet and social media, had been exploited to disseminate racist ideas, hate messages and incitement to racial hatred and violence, and he had noted how legal, regulatory, technical and other practical challenges remained a barrier to the fight against racism and incitement to racial hatred and violence on the internet owing to the lack of clarity in legal terms, differing laws and the trans-border nature of the internet.

Mr. Ruteere had also reported on the role and place of education in addressing deep-rooted discrimination and the legacies of historical injustices and as a means to enable individuals and groups to lift themselves out of poverty; on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance in sports, focusing on the increasing frequency of incidents of racism at various sporting events; and on the role of data and statistics in combatting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance. The second part of the thematic report presented some of the challenges linked to combatting racism, xenophobia and discrimination in the current context of countering terrorism threats and examined how hate speech and measures taken by some Governments might have fuelled racism, xenophobia and discrimination against persons or groups of persons owing to their ethnic origin, religion or migration status in the context of countering terrorism. The report found that the aggressive counter-terrorism policies had disproportionately affected people from Middle Eastern countries, considerably restricting their freedom of movement. Many countries had adopted laws with vague definitions of terrorism and those overly broad measures had led in some instances to violations of fundamental human rights.

Mr. Ruteere said his second report focused on combatting the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that fuelled contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other related intolerance. He continued to call upon States to reinforce their criminal laws to provide for heavier sanctions regarding offences with racist, xenophobic, anti-Semitic or homophobic motivations, and encouraged States to collect disaggregated data and statistics on racist, xenophobic and anti-Semitic crimes. Finally, he encouraged States to increase cooperation with civil society, regional and international human rights mechanisms. Good practices should be shared and replicated whenever possible.

Turning to his country visit reports, Mr. Ruteere said that Argentina had developed a comprehensive legal framework for the elimination of racial discrimination and had also established a number of institutions to promote human rights and anti-discrimination, including the Secretariat for Human Rights. Discriminatory practices in Argentina often targeted the poor and the most vulnerable persons from minority groups, and migrants, both documented and undocumented, continued to face racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia in many areas.

The protection against racism and racial discrimination in Australia was provided for in several federal laws and there were credible and active institutions in the fight against racism and discrimination, with the Australian Human Rights Commission conducting exemplary work. The Special Rapporteur expressed appreciation of the “Closing the Gap” strategy which aimed to achieve the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander equality within 25 years, but he also noted a range of challenges of continued discrimination against indigenous peoples, including disproportionate incarceration rates. Remarks made by elected politicians about newly arrived migrants, and particularly against Muslims, were of a particular concern in a country which valued immigration and multiculturalism.

In Fiji, Mr. Ruteere had been impressed by the policy of inclusiveness which had resulted in a comprehensive reform of the education system and in particular the end of the practice of separate ethnic schools, and expressed his appreciation for the efforts of the people of Fiji to put the history of political instability behind them. Still, the space and opportunities to constructively discuss issues of ethnicity and race within the society at large remained rather limited, and the Special Rapporteur underscored the essential role of civil society, the media, academics, and religious groups and organizations in spearheading conversations to ensure healing and reconciliation among all Fijians.

Statements by Concerned Countries

Argentina, speaking as a concerned country, said that since the adoption of the 2005 Action Plan on Discrimination, Argentina had made significant progress in providing reparations for vulnerable groups that had seen their rights violated in the past. Since the visit of the Special Rapporteur, Argentina, holding the Presidency of the Common Market of the South (Mercosur), had organized the twenty-ninth meeting of the High Authorities of Mercosur for Human Rights at the end of May. Seven Commissions specialized on human rights had foreseen and worked on the elaboration of a regional campaign for the prevention of xenophobia and racism. Furthermore Argentina was on its way to provide reparations for indigenous people. The 672/2016 bill created a Consultative Council for the Indigenous People in Argentina aimed at creating operative space for the participation and representation of these persons.

Australia welcomed the Special Rapporteur’s visit, and noted that the country had a long history of engaging with Special Procedures. As one of the globe’s most diverse countries, Australians spoke more than 260 languages and observed all the world’s major religions. Each Australian was entitled to the same respect and opportunities. All forms of racism should be actioned against. However, racism continued in Australia, as in all other countries. The Australian Human Rights Commission had a campaign called “Racism stops with me.” Racism and discrimination were unacceptable as they undermined cohesiveness. The Australian Government valued diversity, and was working to ensure that public institutions reflected that. The Special Rapporteur was asked how social media could be a tool for combatting racism rather than a means of spreading it.

Fiji welcomed the Special Rapporteur’s constructive report on his visit, which had had the potential to be divisive, as race relations in Fiji were a sensitive subject and there was insufficient debate about it. But Fiji welcomed an objective assessment, and it was hoped the Special Rapporteur’s visit would commence an informed dialogue in which diversity was welcomed. Regarding recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur, he had suggested that the Fijian Government should keep disaggregated data to track the success of its policies. That was an important issue, as for more than 100 years Fijians had been determined only by their ethnicities. It was only under the current Government that visitors were not required to state their ethnicity on arrival. Fiji was cautious in that gathering data on race, it might remind Fijians of that history. Fiji undertook to discuss the proposal. Fiji welcomed the recognition to include other markers of difference such as gender, age, and access to social and economic services.

Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related

El Salvador, speaking on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, said that one of the most effective measures to stymie political extremism was through formal and informal education, and reiterated the need to tackle the conditions that spurred terrorism. Why did the scourges of Nazism and neo-Nazism continue to pose a challenge today? Tunisia, speaking on behalf of the African Group, said that it should be borne in mind that political will was extremely important in the fight against the scourge of racism and racial discrimination. European Union shared deep concern about the increase of populist language and hate speech in political discourse and the alarming level of discriminatory and xenophobic narratives that portrayed migrants and refugees as a threat to national security.

Russia noted the growing repression against migrants and religious and ethnic minorities, which showed that racist ideas in the world were spreading, not only due to economic factors but also by the elevation of racism and hate to the level of Government policies, as was the case in Ukraine. Greece said that the continued economic and financial crisis, which had started in 2008, together with the negative impact of globalization, had led to the most unequal distribution of wealth in recent history and to the rise of populist and extremist political movements and ideas which targeted the most vulnerable such as migrants, refugees and minorities. Cuba was deeply concerned that some countries, which claimed they were the champions of human rights, used counter-terrorism to adopt discriminatory measures and policies against migrants just because they came from certain countries or belonged to a certain religion. It was imperative for the United Nations to speak as one and promote effective measures for the elimination of such practices.

HRC30_31 United States reiterated the need to protect fundamental freedoms, including freedoms of expression and religion or belief in the course of countering racism and racial discrimination. The Special Rapporteur was asked how governments, civil society and private actors could better cooperate to facilitate an environment that fostered sustainable prosperity for all. Mexico asked for the Special Rapporteur’s opinion on States’ responsibility to intervene in certain circumstances, as well as what were good practices for implementing the United Nations’ global plan to counter terrorism. Switzerland asked who were the experts and relevant stakeholders that the Special Rapporteur intended to consult in drafting his next report, and how could the international community support him in his work on that topic? Which measures should be taken to strengthen the implementation of the legal and regulatory framework to combat racism and xenophobia in the context of the anti-terrorist fight?

Poland said that it was not just Muslims but also representatives of other religions, including Christians, who were subjected to xenophobia and racist crimes, incidents and discrimination. Poland had a standing invitation to all United Nations Special Procedures.
Spain said counter-terrorism posed challenges to the fight against racial discrimination, which led to xenophobic discourse and laws. Saudi Arabia reaffirmed its commitment to prohibiting racial discrimination and that stemmed from the Islamic Sharia which prohibited discrimination in all its forms. Islamophobia was widespread today, and the international community needed to review all legal texts.
Brazil underscored that xenophobia against migrants, refugees and asylum seekers constituted one of the main sources of contemporary racism. Brazil was particularly concerned that hate speech seemed to be part of the current populist discourse. Racial discrimination and xenophobia could not be tolerated to fight terrorism. France was concerned about the increase of hate speech. In the aftermath of terrorist attacks, France was committed to fight against Islamophobic and anti-Semite attitudes and to step up the fight against prejudiced stereotypes. It was important to work with non-governmental organizations in order to provide training and education on discrimination. Venezuela voiced concerns about the relationship between the growing economic inequalities in western countries and the rise of nationalist parties. Against the backdrop of the migrant crisis, the increase of racism and xenophobia needed to be addressed urgently in order to protect the rights of the most vulnerable groups.

Egypt stressed that policies adopted by States to counter terrorism were often used as justification for discrimination and racism. Egypt firmly rejected the connection between terrorism and any culture or religion. The spread of xenophobic discourse against migrants in the context of terrorism was particularly worrisome in western countries. South Africa stressed the urgent need for countries to work in close cooperation in order to address global terrorism which had contributed to fuel already existing stereotypes and prejudices. South Africa reiterated its full support to the Special Rapporteur and stressed the need to carry further efforts to erase racism, discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. Morocco called on the Member States of the Council to stop the spread of xenophobic ideas that were the root cause of radical ideas. Promoting equal economic and social opportunities for all as well as implementing policies based on gender equality constituted priorities for Morocco. Morocco finally reasserted the indivisibility of its national identity and territory.

Tunisia said that the increase of xenophobia and racism continued to be among the most important global challenges which required the international community to double its efforts to effectively address those phenomena, including through the implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. Kenya continued to be the target of heinous terrorist attacks in which many lives had been lost and the Government had adopted measures to counter terrorism and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of its citizens, including the creation in 2011 of the Police Oversight Authority and the adoption of the police code of conduct. Costa Rica was deeply concerned about discourse of extremist politicians, social networks and the press inciting racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance. How could the laws on prevention of terrorism be amended to be in line with human rights standards?

Ecuador was concerned about human rights violations faced by migrants and asylum seekers and about xenophobia towards migrants and other vulnerable groups that was used in many countries against those coming from different societies. The countries receiving migrants should treat them as human beings with rights, which should not be dependent on their migratory status. Bolivia shared concern about crimes caused by prejudice and xenophobia, and the increase in xenophobic feelings and racist discourse, particularly at border crossings where unlawful violations of fundamental freedoms and rights often occurred. Human rights must be at the heart of all border control measures, and migrants must be protected against any discrimination. Iraq strongly condemned all forms of discrimination and said that its Constitution provided for full equality of all Iraqis without any discrimination. Iraq had taken various measures and reforms in the judicial and legal fields to implement the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Georgia said it was committed to the promotion and protection of human rights for all without discrimination on any grounds. The United Nations global counter-terrorism strategy provided an appropriate framework for States to balance counter-terrorism measures with human rights. Botswana said that as the world was becoming vulnerable to terrorism acts, there was a greater risk that countries could inadvertently adopt measures that might fuel racism, xenophobia and discrimination against persons or groups owing to their ethnic origin, religion or migration status. Council of Europe said 2016 was characterised by a strong surge in nationalistic populism. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance had published an annual report outlining the main trends in the fields of racism and discrimination in Europe.

Malaysia remained concerned that racism and xenophobia had been exacerbated by the rise of populism, noting that there were challenges in addressing racism and xenophobia while countering terrorism. The Special Rapporteur was asked to elaborate on best practices for building national resilience against hate speech. Armenia shared the concern of the Special Rapporteur about xenophobia increasing around the world, drawing his attention to discrimination against Armenians openly promulgated by Azerbaijan on a daily basis. Azerbaijan said manifestations of extremism were on the rise in many regions. The Government of Armenia’s rhetoric was ridiculous. The Special Rapporteur was asked to elaborate on the role of events to combat racism and xenophobia. Libya expressed its concerns regarding all forms of racism, discrimination and intolerance, especially hate speech in the context of migration. Libya reiterated its full commitment to fight against discrimination on any grounds. It was urgent to put an end to the rise of hate speech, the main tool being education.

Touro Law Centre, the Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust deplored that the Human Rights Council had failed to notice the anti-Semitism at its heart. There had been continued violent hate speech against Jews in the session. The Centre considered that the United Nations supported anti-Semitism in the report.

International Movement against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism encouraged the Council to investigate the situation in countries where governments portrayed non-governmental organizations as terrorist groups. The Movement called on the Special Rapporteur to cooperate more with non-governmental organizations in his next report.

World Jewish Congress said it had repeatedly condemned any forms of racism. It condemned the terrorist acts against the British Jewish community. Other society actors were encouraged to engage in fighting against racism of any form. United Nations Watch criticized the presence of countries with a low human rights agenda in the Council. In several countries, teachers routinely promoted anti-Semitism in school. This was only one of the examples of repeated anti-Semitic acts. Minority Rights Group said with regard to combatting racism and xenophobia in the context of countering terrorism that populist movements used the public’s fear of terrorism as a means to gain wider support for their messages of exclusion and to access power, and this was not only the case in western Europe and north America, but also in China, Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, Kenya and Chile.




For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC17/102E