MORNING - Human Rights Council Discusses the Right to Development, Hears that the Time Has Come for the World Community To Give the Right to Development its Legitimate Space in the Universe of Human Rights
The Human Rights Council this morning took up discussions on the right to development, holding an interactive dialogue with the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, and starting an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the right to development.
Liliana Valiña, Chair-Rapporteur of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said today she was presenting the three thematic studies that completed the first set of five studies conducted by the Expert Mechanism during its first term. The study on the “Right to development in international investment law” explored the current and future role of the right to development in international investment law, analysing the right to development in existing international investment law and exploring the evolving role of investors as duty holders.
The study on “Inequality, social protection and the right to development” examined inequality within and among States through the framework of the right to development. It placed social protection systems within the context of State obligations, international cooperation and global partnerships. The study on the “Duty to cooperate and non-State actors” presented best practices and provided recommendations on how non-State actors could contribute to the duty to cooperate for the implementation of the right to development worldwide.
In the discussion, many speakers said achieving sustainable and inclusive development was among their political and policy priorities. Inclusive and sustainable development could only be achieved through the full enjoyment of all human rights, be they civil, cultural, economic, political, or social, by all. Some speakers highlighted concerns about the challenges faced by developing countries due to crises, such as the pandemic or structural obstacles like the lack of national resources and capacities, which undermined sustainable development. Some speakers emphasised that certain Western countries continued to conduct military operations and used unilateral coercive measures in an abusive manner, which impeded the right to development.
The Council then started an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the right to development.
Surya Deva, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to development, said the right to development was a human right relevant for everyone, everywhere. But this right remained unrealised for millions of people in all world regions due to multiple challenges. He identified six challenges undermining the ability of States and other actors to fully realise the right to development: conceptual confusion, limited capacities, polarisation, lack of participation, inequalities, and the neo-colonial and neoliberal order. The report outlined targeted strategies to overcome these challenges.
Mr. Deva said there was overwhelming evidence that the current model of development was neither inclusive nor sustainable. The world therefore needed a new model of “planet-centred participatory development”. All decision makers should adopt a bottom-up approach to participation and recognise the agency of all individuals, peoples and communities to determine their development aspirations and priorities. The time had come for the world community to give the right to development its legitimate space in the universe of human rights. In this context, it would be critical to adopt the draft Covenant on the Right to Development as soon as possible and take proactive measures to implement the right at the national level.
Mr. Deva spoke of the visit of his predecessor to Albania. Albania spoke as a country concerned.
In the discussion, speakers said the right to development was rooted in the universality, indivisibility, interrelation, and interdependence of all human rights. States had the primary responsibility for the full realisation of human rights. As the international community reached the mid-point of the 2030 Agenda, less than 20 per cent of the Sustainable Development Goal targets were on track. All States were urged to ensure that no one was left behind and to abstain from actions that violated human rights. Each day climate change, and multiple crises and conflicts persisted, affecting people and countries in vulnerable situations the most. Some speakers said the assessment of unilateral coercive measures, as one of the factors impeding the realisation of the right to development, would contribute to the development of recommendations for solving the problems outlined in the report.
Speaking in the discussion with the Expert Mechanism were European Union, Ecuador, Iraq, China, Malawi, Malaysia, Armenia, Zimbabwe, Russian Federation, South Africa, Bangladesh, Namibia, Pakistan, Tanzania, Tunisia, Algeria, Cuba, Venezuela, Nigeria, Mauritania, India, Iran, Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Oman, Madagascar, Syria, South Centre, Azerbaijan, Honduras, and Egypt.
Also speaking were Sikh Human Rights Group, Jameh Ehyagaran Teb Sonnati Va Salamat Iranian, International Muslim Women's Union, International-Lawyers.Org, Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Asian-Pacific Resource and Research Centre for Women, International Council of Russian Compatriots, Beijing NGO Association for International Exchanges, Federatie van Nederlandse Verenigingen tot Integratie Van Homoseksualiteit - COC Nederland, and World Barua Organization.
Speaking in the discussion with the Special Rapporteur were Lithuania on behalf of the Nordic-Baltic countries, European Union, Côte d'Ivoire on behalf of the African Group, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Libya on behalf of the Arab Group, Iran on behalf of a group of countries, United Nations Development Programme, Egypt, Luxembourg, Holy See, Kuwait, Paraguay, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Honduras, China, Malawi, Malaysia, State of Palestine, Armenia, Brazil, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Cameroon, Bangladesh, Angola, Maldives, Burkina Faso, Tanzania, Panama, Tunisia, Morocco, Djibouti, Algeria, Cuba, Togo, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Philippines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Belarus, Zambia, Syrian Arab Republic, Viet Nam, Kazakhstan, Sudan, Iran, and Romania.
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-fourth regular session can be found here.
The Council will reconvene at 3 p.m. this afternoon, to continue the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the right to development, followed by the presentation of reports by the Working Group on the Right to Development and the Working Group on the Activities of Private Military and Security Companies. The Council will then hear the presentation of thematic reports of the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner, followed by the general debate under item three on the promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development.
Interactive Dialogue with the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development
Reports
The Council has before it the reports of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development on the Right to development in international investment law (A/HRC/54/82); Inequality, social protection and the right to development (A/HRC/54/83), and on the Duty to cooperate and non-State actors (A/HRC/54/84).
Presentation of Reports
LILIANA VALIÑA, Chair-Rapporteur of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said the Expert Mechanism completed its first three-year term of mandate earlier this year. Since its last report to the Council in September last year, it had held two sessions, in October 2022, and in April 2023. Today she was presenting the three thematic studies that completed the first set of five studies conducted by the Expert Mechanism during its first term.
The study “Right to development in international investment law” explored the current and future role of the right to development in international investment law. It analysed the right to development in existing international investment law and explored the evolving role of investors as duty holders. It addressed the question of whether arbitrators should have a proven record of human rights expertise as a prerequisite of their appointment to adjudicate investment disputes. The study recognised the importance of international cooperation and community participation – inherent to the idea of the right to development – in new international investment agreements, and provided recommendations to States for their negotiation of new agreements and renegotiation of existing ones.
The study “Inequality, social protection and right to development” examined inequality within and among States through the framework of the right to development. It placed social protection systems within the context of State obligations, international cooperation and global partnerships, as outlined in the Declaration on the Right to Development, and the new social contract, as outlined in the Secretary-General’s report “Our Common Agenda”. The study offered recommendations to States and other stakeholders to address deepening inequalities within and among States by establishing universal social protection systems as a fundamental human right understood through the principle of equality of opportunity for development.
The study “Duty to cooperate and non-State actors” presented best practices and provided recommendations on how non-State actors could contribute to the duty to cooperate for the implementation of the right to development worldwide. The study looked at the operationalisation of the general duty of non-State actors to cooperate in the realisation of the right to development by breaking the duty to cooperate down into four components, and finally outlined implications of the implementation of this duty on States and rights holders and reinforced the importance of giving a voice to rights holders on the obstacles that they faced in realising the right to development.
Discussion
In the discussion, many speakers thanked the Expert Mechanism for the annual report and the three thematic studies. They welcomed the efforts by the Mechanism to advance the discourse on the right to development, and to highlight the centrality of the right to development to the full realisation of human rights. Speakers looked forward to the elaboration of the study themes during the Mechanism’s next three-year tenure. They concurred with the recommendation of the Expert Mechanism that underlined the need for States to adopt multidimensional approaches to inequality reduction in developing policies and strategies to address the complexity of the political and socio-economic factors that widened inequality.
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was grounded in international human rights law and emphasised the obligations of all States to respect, protect and fulfil human rights and fundamental freedoms for all. The right to development was at the core of the universality, indivisibility, interrelatedness and interdependence of all human rights. Many speakers said achieving sustainable and inclusive development was among their political and policy priorities. Inclusive and sustainable development could only be achieved through the full enjoyment of all human rights, be they civil, cultural, economic, political, or social, by all.
Some speakers highlighted concerns about the challenges faced by developing countries due to crises, such as the pandemic, or structural obstacles, which undermined sustainable development, such as lack of national resources and capacities. It was important for States to adopt measures conducive to overcoming poverty and inequality in a context of human rights. The right to development of developing countries deserved attention from the international community. It was essential to promote the co-responsibility of all actors in the promotion and protection of all rights, including the right to development. Social protection was a human right, and the fact that States ignored their obligations on protecting this right was why inequality had not been eradicated throughout the world.
Some speakers emphasised that certain Western countries continued to conduct military operations and used unilateral coercive measures in an abusive manner, which impeded the right to development. They called on the Expert Mechanism to intensify its studies on these violations and help the affected countries safeguard their right to development. A number of speakers reiterated the call for the lifting of all unilateral coercive measures which had a detrimental impact on the capacity of sanctioned States to meet their socio-economic and broader developmental obligations. This underscored the importance of respecting the right of States to choose their own path to development without interference.
Some speakers outlined national steps their countries had taken in achieving the right to development.
Intermediary Remarks
LILIANA VALIÑA, Chair-Rapporteur of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said the Expert Mechanism appreciated the level of cooperation it enjoyed with States. Many had agreed on the main challenges that the world faced with the realisation of the right to development, focusing on issues of poverty, inequality, the pandemic, lack of resources, limited national capacities, climate change and the climate crisis, and natural disasters. All of these challenges were part of the work being carried out by the Mechanism, which was called upon to promote the right to development on the basis of identifying these challenges and best practices at the national and local levels that were being implemented. Many States agreed with many of the points and the recommendations in the studies: this was the role of recommendations, to push towards progress, through small and medium steps to change the structure of inequality that existed, all agreed, at the global and national level in most countries. Thematic studies reflecting the concerns of the international community were a focus of the Mechanism, and it was focusing on new issues, inspired by the comments sent by States. It was important to deal with the real difficulties that countries faced in the realisation of the right. The Expert Mechanism also carried out its work in light of the work of other United Nations bodies, and this was why it was examining the proposals made to ensure that there was a focus on the right to development in preparations for the Summit for the Future, aiming to make its own contribution.
Discussion
In the continuing discussion, some speakers said they considered the work of the Expert Mechanism to be very relevant, with a view to paving the way for the full and effective implementation of the principles contained in the United Nations Declaration on the Right to Development. They pledged their support to any initiative which supported the realisation of the right to development as an inalienable human right. Speakers also supported the Expert Mechanism’s mandate and wished it full success in its work.
Many speakers endorsed the recommendation of the Expert Mechanism that States should recognise the urgent calls for the reform of the international financial architecture to address debt issues that affected the human rights of current and future generations. Making these institutions more representative of the international community and more transparent in the carrying out of their activities was essential for their continued existence and their relevance to a more just and equitable international order. The Expert Mechanism was urged to follow up its discussion of this matter with concrete and specific recommendations for the reform of the international financial mechanisms.
Some speakers said success in reducing inequality worldwide required States to invest in social protection programmes; sustained international partnerships were necessary to support these programmes, particularly in resource-constrained developing countries and regions. Development needs and the level of financing means were highly correlated. A number of speakers said unilateral coercive measures were disrupting this connection due to their negative inherent effects. It was important to invest in the role of the private sector to increase the level of international development cooperation, while emphasising the obligations of States to exercise due diligence to ensure that businesses under their jurisdiction did not violate international law.
The report of the Expert Mechanism set out advanced solutions to put the right to development at the heart of the current challenges facing the world and future generations. The consideration of future generations and the contribution of youth engagement in policy and decision-making processes contributing to development was welcomed. Development was undoubtedly a multidimensional concept, reflecting all dimensions of human rights: civil, cultural, economic, political, social and, also environmental. In this regard, some speakers outlined climate change as a key factor affecting their right to development, which needed to be addressed. Speakers also stressed the importance to continue consultations with civil society, particularly those with expertise in the field of development.
It was important to consider the concept of shared international responsibility, solidarity and cooperation, as well as respect for the right of States to choose their own development path. Speakers underscored the role of collective obligations within the framework of global and regional partnerships, and through international cooperation and solidarity, in particular by interpreting international cooperation as a duty within the United Nations Charter.
Concluding Remarks
LILIANA VALIÑA, Chair-Rapporteur of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, said there was agreement that the right to development was a fundamental human right - its attainment allowed States to ensure that the needs of their populations with regard to the achievement of human rights were guaranteed. There needed to be a change in how it was approached: the problems around accessing the right to development showed the need for a global commitment by all States to be shouldered, and international cooperation was key in this regard. All States were responsible for addressing development priorities within and in cooperation with their communities, in transparency and avoiding corruption, which was a great challenge in as of itself. International cooperation, including South-South cooperation, was required, and it should genuinely take into account the priorities of the country being worked with, underpinning national priorities, and being transparent.
The improvement of global access to the right to development by all countries and peoples meant greater guarantees around security and peace and the ability to better attain solutions to current crises, whether this be the climate crisis, the crisis of exclusion facing many vulnerable groups, and others. This was part of the work of all: to work together, to share good practices and efforts in the field, and to support public policy and mechanisms to ensure that equal opportunities were made available to achieve the right to development. The Expert Mechanism was profoundly committed to continuing to work with civil society, States parties and all parties involved, including the private sector, which had a linchpin role. The Expert Mechanism remained committed to promoting the right to development globally and putting inequalities into the history books.
Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Development
Reports
The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to development on Reinvigorating the right to development: A vision for the future (A/HRC/54/27), and its two annexes on his visit to Albania (A/HRC/45/27/Add.1) and comments by Albania on his visit (A/HRC/54/27/Add.2).
Presentation of Reports
SURYA DEVA, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to development, presenting his vision report as the Special Rapporteur, said he would also be reporting on a country visit to Albania conducted by his predecessor, Mr. Saad Alfarargi. The right to development was a human right relevant for everyone, everywhere, and was central to the Sustainable Development Goals, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on Financing for Development, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Paris Agreement. But this right remained unrealised for millions of people in all world regions due to multiple challenges.
In the report, he identified six challenges undermining the ability of States and other actors to fully realise the right to development: conceptual confusion, limited capacities, polarisation, lack of participation, inequalities, and the neo-colonial and neoliberal order. The report outlined targeted strategies to overcome these challenges. His report also highlighted several specific ways in which the right to development added a unique value to international human rights law.
There was overwhelming evidence that the current model of development was neither inclusive nor sustainable. The world therefore needed a new model of “planet-centred participatory development”. The right to development went hand in hand with the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. Moreover, all development policies, programmes and projects should be developed through the active, free and meaningful participation of people in an inclusive manner. All decision makers should adopt a bottom-up approach to participation and recognise the agency of all individuals, peoples and communities to determine their development aspirations and priorities.
Mr. Deva said he had set out three primary goals for his mandate: to promote a holistic understanding of the right to development; to mainstream the right to development into governance mechanisms at all levels; and to bridge the political divide between the Global North and the Global South regarding the right to development. To mainstream the right to development, he had begun engaging with various United Nations agencies, Governments, national human rights institutions, businesses, civil society organizations and academia, and would soon be developing policy briefs providing practical guidance to States on implementing the right to development at the national level. He would also establish an academic circle on the right to development and constitute a global advisory body comprising children and youth.
During his mandate, he would focus on four sets of thematic issues concerning actors, beneficiaries, causes and disrupters. Particular attention would be devoted to the role of States, international financial institutions, public development banks, and businesses. Three potential disrupters to realising the right to development would also be explored: conflicts, climate change and new technologies. The time had come for the world community to give the right to development its legitimate space in the universe of human rights. In this context, it would be critical to adopt the draft Covenant on the Right to Development as soon as possible and take proactive measures to implement the right at the national level.
Mr. Deva presented the report of his predecessor, Mr. Alfarargi, regarding the country visit that he conducted to Albania in November 2022. Mr. Alfarargi visited the capital Tirana and the municipalities of Elbasan and Kamëz and met with representatives of the Government, civil society organizations and United Nations agencies. In his recommendations, Mr. Alfarargi encouraged all levels of government to involve, at an early stage, civil society and other stakeholders in discussions relating to development plans and policies and to allow adequate time for the consideration of their input. He provided a series of recommendations on amending different laws and by-laws to improve the participation of persons with disabilities, women, minorities and other vulnerable segments of the society in political, social, cultural and economic development.
Statement by Country Concerned
Albania, speaking as a country concerned, thanked the Special Rapporteur for acknowledging the impressive progress Albania had achieved in the field of the right to development. Albania had achieved impressive progress regarding the participation of women in governing and decision-making bodies, such as the Central Government, the public administration, and the judiciary system, and was on its way to achieve a high level of women’s representation at management senior level in businesses and corporates as well. It had developed and improved the policy framework on anti-discrimination, in accordance with international standards. The legislation on inclusion and accessibility for persons with special needs had been completed with the necessary set of by-laws for full and effective implementation.
In 2017, the Parliament had adopted the Law on the Protection of National Minorities, which recognised nine minority groups, thus eliminating the distinction between national and linguistic minorities. The participation of civil society organizations in the discussion leading to the formulation of domestic development policies, legislation and budgeting was fundamental to the advancement of the right to development. Albania was strongly committed to work further closely with civil society organizations in various meaningful consultation processes. Albania shared the same concern as the Special Rapporteur about the need for decisive actions to give a boost to the development of communities in remote rural areas.
Discussion
In the discussion, many speakers welcomed the Special Rapporteur on the right to development and thanked him for his inaugural report submitted to the Council. The report reviewed the overall achievements made towards the realisation of the right to development and addressed the overall challenges and ways to overcome them. Speakers welcomed the three objectives that the Special Rapporteur had pursued in his mandate, and believed that all three were intimately related. A comprehensive understanding of the right to development required greater spaces for dialogue and exchange of views. Speakers wished the Special Rapporteur every success in his new functions.
The right to development was rooted in the universality, indivisibility, interrelation, and interdependence of all human rights. States had the primary responsibility for the full realisation of human rights. Development contributed to the enjoyment of other human rights when implemented in accordance with international human rights norms and principles. A human-rights based approach to sustainable development, which focussed on efforts that reduced inequalities in accordance with the principles of equality and non-discrimination, was essential. Likewise, the full realisation of all human rights for all was a condition to achieve inclusive and sustainable development.
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was the shared global roadmap, prioritising the eradication of poverty and the achievement of sustainable and inclusive development worldwide by 2030. As the international community reached the mid-point of the 2030 Agenda, less than 20 per cent of the Sustainable Development Goal targets were on track. At this mid-point, the promising transformative capacity of the right to development remained confronted by persistent obstacles. For the first time ever, the latest Human Development Index had declined globally for two consecutive years in the wake of interlinked crises. All States were urged to ensure that no one was left behind and to abstain from actions that violated human rights.
Some speakers said each day, climate change, and multiple crises and conflicts persisted, affecting peoples and countries in vulnerable situations the hardest. Climate change, the greatest threat to human rights globally, was accelerating, while conflicts were at their highest levels since 1945. Climate change represented a major challenge for States, especially developing countries, least developed countries and small island developing States, in realising the right to development. This was due to significant negative repercussions on the environment, such as drought, desertification, access to safe drinking water, threats to food security, the spread of epidemic diseases, and famine, thus threatening stability and promoting conflicts.
Dialogue and cooperation needed to move forward together to create a common future that left no one and no place behind. One speaker noted that colonial legacies, systemic racism, and violations of the rights of indigenous persons had a negative impact on human rights and the right to development, and countries concerned should take responsibility. To drive forward the right to development, much more needed to be done to reduce inequalities that threatened fundamental rights and progress.
A number of speakers said the realisation of the right to development required the development of a coordination plan between the efforts of actors involving Governments, civil society, development agencies, international financial institutions, and the private sector. All international aspirations and efforts aimed at realising and promoting the right to development would only be achieved through the development of a binding and comprehensive legal framework, with a participatory process, with the aim of promoting the right to development at all national, regional and international levels, and building more resilient and sustainable societies. It was also important to address gaps in technical cooperation in countries.
Some speakers asked about examples of judicial interpretation of the right to development. Could the Special Rapporteur elaborate on claims brought by individuals to courts on the basis of the right to development? What were the Special Rapporteur’s views on how States could enhance the implementation of the 2030 Agenda without losing focus and ensuring that all human rights were equally protected? What were the views of the Special Rapporteur on unilateral coercive measures as a ‘disrupter’ to the full realisation, by sanctioned States, of the right to development?
Intermediary Remarks
SURYA DEVA, Special Rapporteur on the right to development, said he appreciated that many States were addressing his report: the number of speakers on the list was a positive sign of how the report had been endorsed by States. With regard to some of the questions raised, as he had said in the report, States had primary duties under international human rights law, but States alone did not have those duties. They also devolved on businesses, international financial institutions, development banks, and others. International cooperation and solidarity were also a responsibility. Many laws were extra-territorial as States were trying to promote universal human rights beyond their boundaries.
Issues of inequalities could not be overcome by say 20 Member States working alone - States had to collaborate to respond to their obligations. On corruption, there was a need for participation, good governance practices, and transparency. On the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals, a number of steps could be taken - in particular for those who benefited least at this time. There was a need for structural changes: the world had enough financial and technological resources, but they needed to be harnessed to benefit all.
Mr. Deva said it was necessary to change development models from the top-down to the bottom-up approach, with the people who benefited from development most in the driver’s seat, ensuring no one was left behind. On how to reinforce the Sustainable Development Goals in the context of climate change, he would elaborate further on this in a later report. The right to development was a cross-cutting thread, relevant to many issues, including the transfer of technologies, and adopting a more holistic, cross-cutting approach was crucial in this regard. He noted that no delegation had said there was no right to development, and this was a positive step in cooperation.
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.
HRC23.118E