AFTERNOON - Human Rights Council Hears that the Gravity and Scale of Violations Committed in Ethiopia Must Not be Forgotten, and that Venezuela Continues to Face Serious Human Rights Challenges

The Human Rights Council this afternoon held an interactive dialogue with the International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia, followed by an interactive dialogue with the High Commissioner for Human Rights on his oral update on the situation of human rights in Venezuela.

Mohamed Chande Othman, Chairperson of the International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia, said since the Commission presented its first report to the Council in September last year, the situation in Ethiopia had evolved significantly. On 2 November, the Federal Government and the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front had signed a Cessation of Hostilities Agreement, and since then, the region had witnessed a significant and so far, sustained reduction in conflict. Despite these positive developments and relatively improved security, the gravity and scale of the violations committed in Ethiopia since November 2020 must not be forgotten.

Mr. Othman said the previous report found reasonable grounds to believe that all parties to the conflict had committed war crimes and violations and abuses of human rights since fighting erupted in November 2020. The Commission continued to investigate these violations, in addition to allegations of serious violations and abuses committed since the signing of the peace agreement. The conclusion of the peace agreement between the Government and the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front was an important step, but the need to investigate alleged violations both before and since the peace agreement remained as important as ever to creating a durable peace with full respect for human rights.

Ethiopia, speaking as a country concerned, said it was focused on the full implementation of lasting peace through a signed peace agreement, which was an African Union convened process. This agreement had stopped the conflict and all forms of hostilities. The second pillar of the implementation was a significant increase in humanitarian aid and the restoration of services. Disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration of former combatants, as overseen by the African Union, was a third mechanism. The agreement had also provided transitional measures, including adopting a policy for accountability, truth-telling and redress for victims, healing and reconciliation. Expert care needed to be taken by the International Commission of Human Rights Experts to ensure that inflammatory information was not repeated, which had the potential to undermine the peace agreement. The Government was firmly committed to investigating all cases of violations of human rights and ensuring that victims received redress.

The National Human Rights Commission of Ethiopia also spoke.

In the discussion, some speakers welcomed the signing of the agreement for lasting peace and the commitment by Ethiopia to implement a comprehensive national transitional justice policy, noting that cooperation with national and international human rights mechanisms on accountability and transitional justice was essential. In order to fight impunity and contribute to holding those responsible to account, it was essential to hold independent, transparent and impartial investigations into all allegations of violations and abuses of international human rights law, and violations of international humanitarian law and international refugee law. Accountability and transitional justice must remain at the core of the peace process.

That certain countries had pushed for the creation of a country-specific mandate on Ethiopia could only lead to conflict between it and the human rights bodies, some speakers said, also pointing out the impact of unilateral coercive measures on the lives of Ethiopians and calling for their immediate lifting. Ethiopia had rejected the mandate, reiterating its intention to continue dialogue on the basis of equality. Ethiopia continued to cooperate with the Council and its mechanisms, providing information on the situation of human rights in the country, and this should be supported, but not through hostile monitoring mechanisms that were doomed to fail.

Speaking in the discussion were the European Union, Norway on behalf of a group of countries, Côte d'Ivoire on behalf of the African Group, Liechtenstein, Ireland, United States, China, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Canada, India, Venezuela, Netherlands, United Kingdom, Spain, Sudan, South Sudan, Niger, Cuba, Sri Lanka, Eritrea, Australia, Iran, Ghana, Nigeria, and Russian Federation.

Also speaking were Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project, Physicians for Human Rights, Every Casualty Worldwide, Coordination des Associations et des Particuliers pour la Liberté de Conscience, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, International Bar Association, CIVICUS - World Alliance for Citizen Participation, and International Organisation for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

The Council then held an interactive dialogue on the oral update of the High Commissioner on the situation of human rights in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

Volker Türk, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said his visit to Venezuela in January had provided an opportunity for an open and frank exchange on the human rights, political and economic challenges facing the country. Venezuela continued to face serious human rights challenges in the civil, political, economic and social spheres. He welcomed the access that had been granted to his team to judicial hearings and hoped to move towards greater access to all detention centres. A free and vibrant space for people to express their opinions was vital, and yet, human rights defenders and journalists continued to face attacks, intimidation, and criminalisation. He was also concerned about media restrictions. The future of indigenous peoples also required immediate attention. Mr. Türk called – again - for the lifting of sectoral sanctions that had exacerbated pre-existing challenges and deepened people’s daily struggle. For reform, and for the restoration of trust, the people of Venezuela required concrete – and collective – actions.

Venezuela, speaking as a country concerned, said it had the pleasure to receive the High Commissioner during a visit last January, where he was able to see the reality of the country without the damaging media filter. It was sad that the High Commissioner was forced to talk about Venezuela under the cover of resolution 51/29, which the State had rejected as a sign of selectivity and politicisation. The resolution was a cacophony of shame and slander. While the sponsors of the initiative wanted to hinder dialogue and cooperation between the Venezuelan Government and the Office of the High Commissioner, Venezuela had responded with the renewal for two years of the Memorandum of Understanding that regulated their common relationship. Venezuela took note of the concerns expressed by the High Commissioner and would provide a detailed response in due course. It was not possible to talk about human rights in Venezuela without addressing the terrible impact of the illegal unilateral coercive measures that affected the country daily.

In the discussion, some speakers said they remained deeply concerned about the human rights violations and abuses, including political repression, in Venezuela, joining the High Commissioner’s call for political and judicial system reforms, as well as for the immediate and unconditional release of arbitrarily detained prisoners. Any sustainable way out of the crisis needed inclusive Venezuelan-led political negotiations, and speakers therefore welcomed the resumption of the negotiations in Mexico, including the social agreement, and encouraged both parties to pursue constructive engagement so that credible, transparent and inclusive elections could be facilitated.

Some speakers said that the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union had imposed extensive unilateral coercive measures on Venezuela, which had seriously hindered its efforts to promote economic and social development, undermining the basic human rights of its people: these should be lifted immediately. Speakers commended Venezuela for its sincere efforts and progress achieved in the human rights system and for showing the spirit of transparent and constructive cooperation with the United Nations human rights mechanisms.

Speaking in the discussion were the European Union, Paraguay on behalf of a group of countries, United States, Ecuador, Portugal, France, China, Peru, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Morocco, Uruguay, Argentina, United Kingdom, Spain, Sudan, South Sudan, Switzerland, Georgia, Chile, Yemen, Bolivia, Sri Lanka, Cuba, Eritrea, Australia, Iran, Nicaragua, Belarus, Niger, Luxembourg, Russian Federation, Burundi, Ukraine, Syria, and Brazil.

Also speaking were CIVICUS - World Alliance for Citizen Participation, International Federation for Human Rights Leagues, International Service for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, International Commission of Jurists, and International Human Rights Association of American Minorities.

The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Human Rights Council’s fifty-second regular session can be found here.

The next meeting of the Council will be at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 22 March, to hold an interactive dialogue on the report of the High Commissioner on Belarus, followed by an interactive dialogue with the Independent International Fact-finding Mission on the Situation of Human Rights in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

Interactive Dialogue with the International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia

Presentation

MOHAMED CHANDE OTHMAN, Chairperson of the International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia, said since the Commission presented its first report to the Council in September last year, the situation in Ethiopia had evolved significantly. On 2 November, the Federal Government and the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front had signed a Cessation of Hostilities Agreement, aimed at ending more than two years of armed conflict that had affected millions of women, men, and children in the Tigray, Afar, and Amhara regions of northern Ethiopia. Since then, the region had witnessed a significant and so far, sustained reduction in conflict. The Commission greatly welcomed the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement and subsequent agreements relating to its implementation.

Since the conclusion of the agreement, the Federal Government had embarked on a series of initiatives that offered a first step towards a locally owned transitional justice process. While it was too early to assess progress, the Commission was hopeful that this and other national processes would contribute towards inclusive, gender-responsive, victim and survivor-centred approaches to accountability, truth-telling and reconciliation, reparations, as well as the establishment of necessary policies for non-recurrence of violations.

Despite these positive developments and relatively improved security, the gravity and scale of the violations committed in Ethiopia since November 2020 must not be forgotten. The previous report found reasonable grounds to believe that all parties to the conflict had committed war crimes and violations and abuses of human rights since fighting erupted in November 2020. The Commission continued to investigate these violations, in addition to allegations of serious violations and abuses committed since the signing of the peace agreement. Under international law, the Federal Government had the primary responsibility to ensure accountability for crimes committed during the conflict.

The Commission had consulted with a wide range of stakeholders to inform its investigation priorities and strategy, investigating alleged violations in Tigray, Afar, Amhara, and Oromia Regions. Regarding the material scope, in addition to the serious offenses discussed in the first report – notably attacks on civilians, sexual and gender-based violence, and denial of humanitarian assistance – it was also addressing other violations, such as arbitrary detention, violation of children’s rights, and hate speech. As required by the mandate, the Commission was investigating alleged violations by all parties, including Eritrean forces operating on Ethiopian territory. However, the Commission regretted that to date, and despite repeated requests, the Ethiopian Government had not yet allowed the investigation team access to the country. The Commission was conducting much of work remotely. The Government should reconsider its decision not to cooperate with the Commission.

The conclusion of the peace agreement between the Government and the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front was an important step, but the need to investigate alleged violations both before and since the peace agreement remained as important as ever to creating a durable peace with full respect for human rights.

Statement by Country Concerned

Ethiopia, speaking as a country concerned, said it was focused on the full implementation of lasting peace through a signed peace agreement, which was an African Union convened process. This agreement had stopped the conflict and all forms of hostilities. The second pillar of the implementation was a significant increase in humanitarian aid and the restoration of services. Disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration of former combatants, as overseen by the African Union, was a third mechanism. In March 2023, consultations were held on the demobilisation and reintegration of former combatants.

The agreement had also provided transitional measures, including adopting a policy for accountability, truth-telling and redress for victims, healing and reconciliation. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission, at the request of the Government, were supporting nationwide consultations on transitional justice. Expert care needed to be taken by the International Commission of Human Rights Experts to ensure that inflammatory information was not repeated, which had the potential to undermine the peace agreement. The Government was firmly committed to investigating all cases of violations of human rights and ensuring that victims received redress.

National Human Rights Commission of Ethiopia said over the last few years, the Ethiopian Commission had been documenting, investigating and reporting on grave human rights violations in parts of the country, despite which it was encouraged by the Pretoria peace agreement. The Commission particularly welcomed the agreement’s provision to create a national accountability authority, and the launching of the national consultation on transitional justice policy options. Between July and December 2022, the Commission spoke to over 700 victims of human rights violations, their families, internally displaced persons, and authorities on their views on transitional justice and non-recurrence. They indicated that their primary needs were to live without fear, to have peace and security, and to receive reparations to get their lives back. The Commission therefore urged the Human Rights Council and the international community to support and coordinate efforts towards the proper designing and implementation of a genuine human rights compliant, holistic and victim-centred transitional justice body for Ethiopia.

Discussion

In the ensuing discussion, some speakers welcomed the signing of the agreement for lasting peace through a permanent cessation of hostilities on 2 November 2022 in Pretoria, and of the declaration of the senior commanders on the modalities for the implementation of the peace agreement on 12 November in Nairobi, and thanked the African Union and its high-level panel for their role in this regard. They also called for further progress on the implementation of the agreement and declaration, continued and unimpeded humanitarian access, and the further expansion of basic services in conflict-related areas in northern Ethiopia. Some speakers also welcomed the commitment by Ethiopia to implement a comprehensive national transitional justice policy, noting that cooperation with national and international human rights mechanisms on accountability and transitional justice was essential.

In order to fight impunity and contribute to holding those responsible to account, it was essential to hold independent, transparent and impartial investigations into all allegations of violations and abuses of international human rights law, and violations of international humanitarian law and international refugee law. Accountability and transitional justice must remain at the core of the peace process.

Human rights monitors should be deployed to the conflict-affected areas in northern Ethiopia. Independent and credible documentation, investigation and prosecution of reported violations and abuses of international human rights law and violations of international humanitarian law were crucial for the victims and their communities and fundamental to ensure lasting reconciliation, peace and stability.

Some speakers shared the concerns expressed by the High Commissioner that the human rights situation in Ethiopia remained concerning in many regions, noting that it was of paramount importance that all conflict-related serious violations and abuses of international human rights law and violations of international humanitarian law were investigated and perpetrators were held accountable. Speakers supported the High Commissioner in stressing the need for continued monitoring and reporting and emphasised the important role the Commission of Human Rights Experts played in this regard. All parties to the conflict were called upon to grant the International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia and its members unhindered access to the region and facilities under their control and to fully cooperate with the Commission. Eritrea should withdraw all its troops from Ethiopia.

That certain countries had pushed for the creation of a country-specific mandate on Ethiopia could only lead to conflict between it and the human rights bodies, some speakers said, also pointing out the impact of unilateral coercive measures on the lives of Ethiopians and calling for their immediate lifting. Ethiopia had rejected the mandate, reiterating its intention to continue dialogue on the basis of equality. Ethiopia continued to cooperate with the Council and its mechanisms, providing information on the situation of human rights in the country, and this should be supported, but not through hostile monitoring mechanisms that were doomed to fail. The community of nations should support any initiative that could lead to improved stability in Ethiopia, acting always with the complete agreement of the Government. The principles of neutrality and objectivity were key elements in the selection of mandate holders, and choosing persons who demonstrated partiality would only have negative effects.

Among questions posed by speakers were: how did the Commission’s work fit into transitional justice as part of the full range of processes and mechanisms associated with a society’s attempts to come to terms with a legacy of large-scale past abuses, in order to ensure accountability, serve justice and achieve reconciliation; how could the Council and the international community best engage with the Government of Ethiopia and all stakeholders to achieve and ensure lasting reconciliation, peace and stability; how could the Commission offer its transitional justice expertise to the Government as it fulfilled its transitional justice commitments as outlined in the Pretoria Agreement; how could the international community best encourage strengthening Ethiopia’s domestic human rights institutions and processes; and what could the Human Rights Council do to further help anchor accountability in future national efforts towards transitional justice?

Concluding Remarks

Ethiopia, speaking as a country concerned, said the transitional justice mechanism would be important in ensuring accountability and redress. The Government had been taking steps to ensure humanitarian assistance and allow unhindered humanitarian access. The Government was also taking steps to repair key infrastructure. Going forward, the international community could best support Ethiopia by redoubling its support to the transitional justice process.

STEVEN RATNER, Member of the International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia, said transitional justice was first and foremost a national responsibility, but was governed by international standards. The policy should flow from genuine consultations from all relevant stakeholders, including the victims of the conflict. This represented an opportunity for the Commission for cooperative and constructive engagement. The mechanism for transitional justice would ensure accountability and justice for those who had committed international crimes; truth, acknowledgement, and redress for the victims; and the establishment of mechanisms to ensure this would not happen again. The Commission would engage with the Ethiopian Government on this, and believed the Council could assist the Commission in carrying out this important part of the mandate.

RADHIKA COOMARASWAMY, Member of the International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia, commended the Pretoria agreement, and reiterated the importance of communication with stakeholders as a priority. An independent international commission working with domestic mechanisms was often relied upon by the Human Rights Council. It was important that this practice was protected within the Council’s work. Witness protection was a key element of any justice process. The Commission needed to partner with the Government of Ethiopia to bring about durable, sustainable peace.

MOHAMED CHANDE OTHMAN, Chair of the International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia , said it was important to press upon Ethiopia to consider engagement with the Commission. This meant that come September, the Commission would be able to deliver a fully, constructive mandate.

Interactive Dialogue on the Oral Update by the High Commissioner on the Situation of Human Rights in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela

Presentation

VOLKER TÜRK, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said his visit to Venezuela in January had provided an opportunity for open and frank exchange on the human rights, political and economic challenges facing the country. Venezuela continued to face serious human rights challenges in the civil, political, economic and social spheres. According to United Nations statistics, there were more than seven million people in need of humanitarian assistance in the country. The readiness expressed by the authorities to engage in judicial and security reforms was a positive step, and Mr. Türk welcomed the access that had been granted to his team to judicial hearings and hoped to move towards greater access to all detention centres. He remained deeply concerned about people who were detained arbitrarily, and reiterated his calls made in January for the immediate release of those detained arbitrarily. Since the last report of July 2022, the team had documented five deaths in the context of security operations, with more allegations received.

On gender issues, the authorities had committed to eliminating the provision in article 565 of the Organic Code of Military Justice, which criminalised same sex relations in the military, and the nullification of this provision by the Supreme Court of Justice was a significant step forward for the acceptance and safety of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer plus individuals in Venezuela. Authorities also resolved to start working, with the support of the Office, on two protocols to investigate numerous alleged cases of femicides and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer plus people. Mr. Türk had encouraged the authorities to engage meaningfully in dialogue with victims and civil society organizations.

A free and vibrant space for people to express their opinions was vital, and yet, human rights defenders and journalists continued to face attacks, intimidation, and criminalisation. He was also concerned about media restrictions, with websites being blocked and radio stations and programmes closed down. Peaceful protests for better working and living conditions, including higher wages and pensions, had increased throughout the country. Peasants, farmers, and other people working in rural areas had also been protesting in defence of their right to land. The future of indigenous peoples also required immediate attention.

Signs of economic recovery brought some hope, but policies to support the country’s economic growth must have human rights at their centre. Free, transparent and equal access to data and information of public interest would be key to achieving this. Mr. Türk called – again - for the lifting of sectoral sanctions that had exacerbated pre-existing challenges and deepened people’s daily struggle. For reform, and for the restoration of trust, the people of Venezuela required concrete – and collective – actions.

Statement by Country Concerned

Venezuela, speaking as a country concerned, said Venezuela had the pleasure to receive the High Commissioner during a visit last January, where he was able to see the reality of the country without the damaging media filter. It was sad that the High Commissioner was forced to talk about Venezuela under the cover of resolution 51/29, which the State had rejected as a sign of selectivity and politicisation. The resolution was a cacophony of shame and slander. While the sponsors of the initiative wanted to hinder dialogue and cooperation between the Venezuelan Government and the Office of the High Commissioner, Venezuela had responded with the renewal for two years of the Memorandum of Understanding that regulated their common relationship. Venezuela took note of the concerns expressed by the High Commissioner and would provide a detailed response in due course.

It was not possible to talk about human rights in Venezuela without addressing the terrible impact of the illegal unilateral coercive measures that affected the country daily. The recent statement of the High Commissioner on the negative impact of these measures, affirming that they hindered the enjoyment of human rights of the Venezuelan people, and recommending they be suspended or lifted, was very important. Venezuela welcomed the vision of the High Commissioner, of engagement and constructive dialogue, and his willingness to ensure that human rights discourse was not manipulated for political ends. Venezuela reiterated its firm commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights, and reaffirmed its willingness to continue to cooperate with the Council.

Discussion

In the ensuing discussion, some speakers said they remained deeply concerned about the human rights violations and abuses, including political repression, in Venezuela, joining with the High Commissioner’s call for political and judicial system reforms, as well as for the immediate and unconditional release of arbitrarily detained prisoners. There was particular concern about the proposed law to regulate and criminalise non-governmental organizations. A peaceful and lasting solution to this crisis could best be achieved through Venezuelan-led, comprehensive negotiations that led to free and fair elections.

Any sustainable way out of the crisis needed inclusive Venezuelan-led political negotiations, and speakers therefore welcomed the resumption of the negotiations in Mexico, including the social agreement, and encouraged both parties to pursue constructive engagement, so that credible, transparent and inclusive elections could be facilitated. It was vital to implement existing recommendations: non-compliance was of concern, in particular when a State was or had been a recent member of the Council. The continued arbitrary detentions, delays in judicial proceedings, and exploitation of indigenous peoples by the armed forces, among others, were also topics of concern. Venezuela was urged to commit to genuine dialogue with the Human Rights Council and its mechanisms.

Some speakers expressed deep concern about new proposed legislation that would further restrict the ability of civil society, including human rights organizations, to operate in Venezuela, saying the bill was in line with similar attempts in Russia and Nicaragua to silence and intimidate anyone who expressed dissent. Reports of human rights violations specifically regarding political opposition, media and human rights defenders were of great concern; however, it was reassuring to hear that the High Commissioner had been able to engage in dialogue with the Government, including on the situation of nationals who had been imprisoned and deprived of their civil and political rights. The authorities should put an end to the persecution of civil society, human rights defenders, journalists and the opposition, implementing the recommendations of the Electoral Observation Mission of the European Union: the only path to solving the crisis was free and fair democratic elections under international observation.

Some speakers said that the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union had imposed extensive unilateral coercive measures on Venezuela, which had seriously hindered its efforts to promote economic and social development, undermining the basic human rights of its people: these should be lifted immediately. The Council and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights should avoid becoming a political tool of some countries and putting pressure on countries, thus impeding their socio-economic development and human rights. The politically motivated pressure and biased approach was counter-productive and undermined the dialogue and cooperation for the genuine promotion and protection of human rights. The Government of Venezuela was commended by some speakers for its sincere efforts and progress achieved in the human rights system and for showing the spirit of transparent and constructive cooperation with the United Nations human rights mechanisms.

Among questions raised by speakers were: a request for the High Commissioner to please elaborate on the status of implementation of human rights’ recommendations made so far, and on which concrete areas his Office would work as per the terms of the new Memorandum of Understanding; what could be done to ensure just and fair conditions in the upcoming elections; how could the Council promote accountability for human rights abuses committed by President Maduro and his supporters; what role could the Office play with regard to the freeing of those arbitrarily detained; had the High Commissioner been able to visit all detention centres in the country; and how could the international community support access to justice for victims of human rights violations?

Concluding Remarks

VOLKER TÜRK, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said it had been important to have the discussion with the authorities in Venezuela, and he recognised the complexity of the situation. Cooperation was the starting point, and Mr. Türk was encouraged by the wide range of dialogue he had while visiting Venezuela. He welcomed the renewal of the Memorandum of Understanding which allowed the team on the ground to continue working for the next two years. His team continued to cooperate with the Inter-institutional Committee and had been able to undertake 24 field visits to different states in the country, engaging with authorities and civil society. The team had conducted visits to around 60 detention centres, attended four judicial hearings, and obtained access to 17 judicial files. However, this did not take away the magnitude of challenges.

During his visit, Mr. Türk had heard from people about their daily struggle to survive. They told of daily power cuts, the unavailability of water, and falling into debt, which caused many to suffer from anxiety and depression. There were more than 7 million people in need of humanitarian assistance on the ground in Venezuela. Some of the sanctions had exacerbated pre-existing vulnerabilities, and it was important to look at the lifting of these sanctions.

Justice and security sector reform were very important, and authorities wanted to advance this. This meant investigations and judicial processes needed to be conducted in a timely manner to ensure victims had the right to justice. The institutional reforms were an opportunity to uphold justice and ensure reparations to victims. This would be difficult, and these efforts needed to be supported. It was important that there was regular access to judicial hearings. Around 312 people who had been arbitrarily detained had been released as a result of action, including by the Office. Mr. Türk expected to see concrete steps to compliment these initiatives. Following his visit, the authorities announced the renewal of the judicial reform and had committed to ensure every person’s right to justice during the Universal Periodic Review.

Fair elections were a fundamental component of an environment which protected human rights, and the office on the ground would continue to advocate for this. The resumption of a national dialogue was positive, and Mr. Türk welcomed efforts from all sides to ensure this process moved forward. It was important to ensure that human rights guided the agreements which would result from this dialogue. The active participation of civil society was vital and needed to be part of the way forward.

Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.

HRC23.038E