HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS UPDATES HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL ON HER ACTIVITIES

Louise Arbour, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, today briefed the Human Rights Council on her activities since last September, which included visits to Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Ireland and Brazil. She also talked about the situation of human rights in Pakistan, Sudan and Somalia, among other issues.

Ms. Arbour said during her visit to Sri Lanka, she paid special attention to the issue of abductions and disappearances, which had been reported in alarming numbers over the past two years. More than two years after her first visit to Afghanistan, Ms. Arbour said was concerned to learn how little the women’s rights agenda had progressed. The transitional justice agenda also remained stalled.
On Pakistan, Ms. Arbour was concerned that emergency rule and actions taken under it had inflicted severe, long-term injury to the judiciary and to civil society.

In Ireland last month, Ms. Arbour said she had addressed a forum of human rights defenders, and took the opportunity to discuss international human rights issues, as well as domestic questions, such as migration and counter-terrorism, with executive and legislative officials. In Brazil, she had had an opportunity to discuss with the President as well as with a wide range of national actors, issues of current concern, and she welcomed the Government’s efforts to implement the constitutionally protected rights of indigenous people, and the social programmes that Brazil put in place to reach millions of poor families.

The situations in Sudan and in Somalia remained of deep concern, Ms. Arbour said. Grave violations of international human rights and humanitarian law continued to be committed in Sudan, for the most part with total impunity. More needed to be done urgently by the Government and the international community to extend adequate protection to civilians. In Somalia, the situation of human rights, particularly in Mogadishu, continued to deteriorate.

Speaking as concerned countries were Afghanistan, Brazil, Gabon, Sri Lanka and Sudan.

During the debate, some speakers expressed concern that this resumed sixth session of the Council was being used to debate country-specific issues, rather than focusing on the review, rationalization and improvement of the Special Procedures, as agreed.

Participating in the debate on the High Commissioner’s statement were Portugal on behalf of the European Union, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Pakistan in its national capacity, Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, Egypt on behalf of the African Group, Canada, China, India, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Netherlands, France, Senegal, Switzerland, Indonesia, Japan, Norway, New Zealand, Algeria, United States, Morocco and Sweden.


Representatives of the following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: North-South XXI, in a joint statement with the Union of Arab Jurists, International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development, International Federation of Human Rights Leagues, Interfaith International, Amnesty International, International Commission of Jurists, Asian Legal Resource Centre, and Human Rights Watch.

Sri Lanka, Iraq and the Netherlands spoke in right of reply.

During the meeting, Doru Romulus Costea, President of the Human Rights Council, said that he wished to interrupt the schedule to inform the Council that two terrorist attacks had taken place in Algiers, the capital of Algeria this morning, with casualties reportedly very high, with as many as 40 killed. One of the attacks had reportedly been close to the United Nations headquarters in the capital, Algiers. In consultation with and in agreement with the Council and the room at large, he wished to express sincere condolences to the Permanent Representative of Algeria for this event, as well as to convey their support to the victims and their families. He also conveyed sympathy to the High Commissioner for Human Rights in light of reports that at least 10 United Nations staffers were missing.

The Council is holding three back-to-back meetings today from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. When the Council concluded its midday meeting at 3 p.m., it immediately started its afternoon meeting to hear the final report of the Group of Experts on Darfur.

Statement by United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

LOUISE ARBOUR, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said with regard to her activities since last September, she had visited Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Ireland and Brazil. During her visit to Sri Lanka, she paid special attention to the issue of abductions and disappearances, which had been reported in alarming numbers over the past two years. Regrettably, the various national institutions and mechanisms that could be expected to safeguard human rights had failed to deliver adequate protection. In particular, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka had had its independence compromised, and the credibility of its work had suffered. Ms. Arbour had suggested that the Government would benefit from the support of a presence of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in the country, with a full mandate incorporating technical assistance and public reporting.

More than two years after her first visit to Afghanistan, Ms. Arbour said she was pleased to see the continued active role being played by the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission and by civil society. At the same time, she was concerned to learn how little the women’s rights agenda had progressed. The transitional justice agenda also remained stalled. The security situation remained very grave, with severe consequences for human rights.

On Pakistan, Ms. Arbour welcomed the release of detainees, including Special Rapporteur Asma Jahangir, and the President’s commitment to lifting the state of emergency and to holding elections early in the New Year. However, she was concerned that emergency rule and actions taken under it had inflicted severe, long-term injury to the judiciary and to civil society. In Ireland last month, Ms. Arbour had addressed a forum of human rights defenders, and took the opportunity to discuss international human rights issues, as well as domestic questions, such as migration and counter-terrorism, with executive and legislative officials.

Ms. Arbour said she had just returned from a visit to Brazil where she had an opportunity to discuss with the President as well as with a wide range of national actors issues of current concern. She welcomed the Government’s efforts to implement the constitutionally protected rights of indigenous people, and the social programmes that Brazil put in place to reach millions of poor families.

The situations in Sudan and in Somalia remained of deep concern, Ms. Arbour said. Grave violations of international human rights and humanitarian law continued to be committed in Sudan, for the most part with total impunity. More needed to be done urgently by the Government and the international community to extend adequate protection to civilians. The rule of law needed to be strengthened, especially in Darfur. In Somalia, the situation of human rights, particularly in Mogadishu, continued to deteriorate.

In positive developments, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ Regional Office for West Africa would be opened soon. There was also broad cross-regional agreement on a General Assembly initiative in support of a moratorium on the application of the death penalty. Another positive development was the adoption of the ASEAN Charter, and its commitment to develop an human rights body. In Bali at this moment, a momentous effort was taking place to address pressing issues related to climate change; the international community should not lose sight of the human rights dimension of environmental degradation.

Ms. Arbour said she was very pleased with the endorsement by the General Assembly of the Human Rights Council’s institution-building package. The Universal Periodic Review process represented potentially the first universal and comprehensive tool for overseeing the application of the principles of the Declaration in a consistent, comprehensive and meaningful manner. A commitment from all States to cooperate with the Special Procedures system and to extend standing invitations to all mandate holders was vital to the realisation of the objectives of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Statements by Concerned Countries

DAOUD HACHEMI (Afghanistan), speaking as a concerned country, said that over the last six years Afghanistan had made strong efforts to respect international human rights standards and its Constitution made explicit reference to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This year, 2007, was a difficult year for Afghanistan’s goals regarding human rights, with problems of armed conflict, poverty and immature institutions. Nevertheless women were still able and encouraged to participate fully in society and could now be found at the head of businesses, institutions, hospitals, schools, non-governmental organizations and civil society organizations. Despite a resurgence of violence, efforts were being maintained but required military, political and humanitarian aid and technical assistance from the international community.

SERGIO ABREU E LIMA FLORENCIO (Brazil), speaking as a concerned country, said the efforts of the High Commissioner were welcomed. Brazil was committed to tightening the relationship with the United Nations human rights system, and in particular with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. It was Brazil’s firm belief that the basis of such a relationship should be fostered by open, transparent dialogue and cooperation. The High Commissioner’s visit, which was in response to an official invitation, was greatly appreciated by Brazil. Brazil believed the High Commissioner could share views and experience with both the Government and civil society, in an absolutely transparent manner. The High Commissioner had a fruitful, frank, transparent and constructive dialogue with President Lula, as well as with the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Justice, and the Special Secretary for Human Rights.

The High Commissioner had witnessed the difficulties Brazil faced in the field of human rights, but also viewed deeply the determination of both the Government and civil society to overcome these. Her visit also gave Brazil the opportunity to provide her with a clear view of the diversity of the Brazilian culture. An expression of this diversity was that she visited both the Brazilian stock exchange in Sao Paolo and a poor slum in Rio de Janeiro, which made her aware of how the culture of Brazil was linked to the African cultural heritage. Brazil was grateful for the mission to Brazil, which was useful, both for the country, as it provided the Government and civil society with a clearer sense of the importance of human rights in providing solid sustainable development in a country which still faced difficulties, and for the High Commissioner in showing her the situation.

PATRICE TONDA (Gabon), speaking as a concerned country, said that Gabon had been very struck by a passage in the High Commissioner's statement, referring to Gabon's accession to the United Nations family as one of the countries that had abolished the death penalty. Following governmental reform in the 1980s, a number of measures had been taken, including the appointment of a Minister for Human Rights, directly responsible to the President. Those reforms emphasized the paramount and strategic importance of human rights for Gabon. No political prisoner or prisoner of conscience was being held in Gabon, and the media operated freely to work in the country.

Gabon welcomed that it would be subject to the Council's Universal Periodic Review in 2008, and wished to reiterate its full support for the Council and the promotion of peace and security within the context of the United Nations.

DAYAN JAYATILLEKA (Sri Lanka), speaking as a concerned country, said that there had been recent terrorist attacks on elected individuals and the civilian population in Sri Lanka. The Government was currently in negotiations with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on two issues – the privacy of the nation and the need for international scrutiny. Sri Lanka had agreed to visits and remained open to scrutiny. However, it was proud of its national institutions. In the aftermath of the recent attacks, the judiciary ruled that roadblocks in the capital city had to be dismantled as they were not fully in keeping with international human rights. Negotiations would always be informed by the principle that national institutions may be supported by international mechanisms but not supplanted by them.

IBRAHIM MARGANI MOHAMMED KHEIR (Sudan), speaking as a concerned country, said the High Commissioner was to be thanked for her commitment to promoting and protecting human rights. The Government of Sudan had always established a sincere dialogue with the different human rights mechanisms, and had done so in order to promote human rights protection in the country. The situation in Sudan was improving, and everyone who had been there could see this. Sudan had been encouraged by the peace agreements. The situation in Darfur was improving now, as compared to the situation at the beginning of the armed conflict, and efforts had been made to implement the Abuja Agreements. Despite all of this, the situation of human rights in Darfur was one of great concern to the Government. There were many factors that influenced this situation, and this was why the international community should help to find solutions.

The Government had been highly patient in determining an end to the armed groupings and revolution, through peace agreements that did away with the causes of the conflict. Some armed groupings had not, however, wished to sign these agreements, and the situation was conducive to ongoing violations of human rights. Some States, particularly those with weight in the international community, had sent messages to the armed groupings. The armed movements could be pushed into signing the peace agreements in this way. Armed movements could not be given free reign, as this undermined the efforts of the Government to find solutions to the conflict. The Government of Sudan called upon international organizations concerned by the situation, as well as to civil society organizations, to redouble their efforts to ensure that the perpetrators of crimes be brought before the courts.

Debate on the High Commissioner’s Statement

FRANCISCO XAVIER ESTEVES (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the European Union strongly supported a wider field presence of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). The European Union valued the existing partnerships developed by the Office worldwide and welcomed the newly established Regional Office for West Africa, in Senegal. Regarding Sri Lanka, while the European Union welcomed the invitation by Sri Lanka to the High Commissioner to visit the country, it remained concerned with the lack of adequate investigation of serious violations of human rights concerning abductions and enforced disappearances there. The European Union called on the authorities to cooperate with all relevant United Nations mechanisms, including through the support of a field office of the OHCHR in Sri Lanka.

The European Union continued to follow closely developments in the field of human rights in Afghanistan, welcomed measures taken by the Government in that regard, and stressed that the development of Afghan civil society groups was essential for highlighting human rights violations. In Pakistan, the European Union believed that stability and development could only be achieved through respect for democracy, and reiterated the importance of holding free and fair elections on schedule, among others. The European Union also reiterated its serious concerns over the continued violence and grave human rights violations in Sudan, and expressed its deep concern with the worsening human rights and humanitarian situation in Somalia. With regard to the latter situation, reports of targeted killings and the inability of journalists to carry out their work were of particular concern.

MASOOD KHAN (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, agreed that the Universal Periodic Review process would represent the first universal and comprehensive tool for overseeing the implementation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, the format and modalities needed to be well defined to avoid multiple interpretations.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference expressed concern that the December session of the Human Rights Council was being used to debate country-specific issues, rather than focusing on the review, rationalization and improvement of Special Procedures, as agreed. The relationship between the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Human Rights Council was a wider issue with long-term implications. A new relationship needed to be explored since the Council had been elevated to the primary human rights law making body in the United Nations system. Two key areas were budgetary oversight and the growing network of field presences, on which the Council ought to have a say.

MASOOD KHAN (Pakistan), speaking in its national capacity, said that civil society in Pakistan had emerged even stronger, and the Government was giving it the necessary space to grow. Civil society was actively engaged in the current process. The European Union was thanked for its concerns.

MARCOS GABRIEL LLUNCH (Cuba), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, wished to take advantage of the presence of the High Commissioner to highlight some issues of concern to the Non-Aligned Movement. The Council had adopted in June the Code of Conduct for Special Procedures mandate holders. However, a lack of enthusiasm towards that important document had been noted. The Non-Aligned Movement troika held a meeting with the Chairperson of the Special Procedures Coordinating Committee, in which they had been informed that the Special Procedures were studying the Code of Conduct in order to improve the Manual for Special Procedures, taking into account the provisions of the Code. The Movement took note of those efforts, but it was their firm view that the Code of Conduct had not been adopted to serve as a basis for the improvement neither of the Manual, nor of any other document. The Code was an intergovernmentally agreed document, designed to be the main basis for the work of the Special Procedures, and the Non-Aligned Movement expected nothing less than full compliance with its provisions.

The Non-Aligned Movement also regretted some recent incidents that compromised the atmosphere of cooperation, dialogue and good faith in the relations between States and some Special Procedure mandate holders. It was unacceptable for a Special Procedure mandate-holder to make a presentation on his/her visit to a country in the framework of an intergovernmental body of the United Nations without having prepared a written report or shared it first with the concerned Government. They were embarking on a new era in the promotion and protection of human rights, but actions of that kind contributed to undermining the principles of impartiality, independence, objectivity and non-selectivity, and international dialogue and cooperation, on which the foundations of the Council's new institutions lay.

OMAR SHALABY (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the African Group, recognized the importance of regional offices of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. It had been hoped that the High Commissioner for Human Rights would acknowledge the efforts made by Sudan in the area of human rights. Sudan had taken steps to implement the recommendations of the Group of Experts appointed by the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The African Group hoped that the regional office would continue to provide support and technical assistance for this process. It also called on the international community to assist in providing resources for the implementation of the recommendations.

The High Commissioner for Human Rights was thanked for taking note of the events in Chad where a non-governmental organization had committed human rights abuses.

MARIUS GRINIUS (Canada) said that Canada was encouraged by the visit of the High Commissioner to Sri Lanka and strongly supported a presence of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in the country. The Sri Lankan Government was urged to accept this support. Of grave concern was the escalation of violence in Sri Lanka. It was believed that the only way to achieve a sustainable solution was through a political process. Sri Lanka should create the conditions for this political process to resume. On Sudan, implementation of the recommendations made by the Expert Group and the Special Rapporteur would serve to increase transparency and stop violence. The continued engagement in Afghanistan was welcomed. The seriousness of the humanitarian situation on Somalia was underscored and the Security Council resolution was supported.

BO QIAN (China) began by expressing shock over the terrorist attack in Algiers, condemned that attack, and expressed sympathy to the victims and their families. China approved the statement made by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and appreciated the briefing on a proposed strategic management programme. It was China's hope that the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) could solicit input from Member States before proceeding to finalize such a programme. Similarly, OHCHR should seek agreement from countries in the region when setting up regional field offices.

On other mechanisms, China hoped that OHCHR could set up a strict internal mechanism to ensure objectivity and non-selectivity in preparing reports for the Universal Periodic Review process. Moreover, China was committed to the issue of improving the geographical composition of the OHCHR. Prolonged deliberations should lead to tangible results. China called on OHCHR to immediately put in place concrete plans to implement the suggestions of the Joint Inspection Unit in that regard.

SWASHPAWAN SINGH (India) said that there was now a clear mandate to implement the institution-building package and the priority was an early operationalization of the Universal Periodic Review mechanism. The process of review, rationalization and improvement of mandates should also be continued.

A sovereign, democratic and pluralistic Afghanistan was strongly supported and commitment was reaffirmed in stabilization, rebuilding and development efforts. Afghanistan was welcomed into the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation earlier this year and should benefit immensely from greater regional integration and connectivity.

MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh) thanked the High Commissioner for sharing her views on human rights situations in countries that she had visited recently. While recognising that the situation was not fully satisfactory in some cases, Bangladesh would suggest seeking solutions from within the country, through strengthening national mechanisms. Cooperation and engagement of States were essential to improve human rights. A better coordination between the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Universal Periodic Review should be espoused. The support and guidance by the Council would have added value for the High Commissioner’s Office to carry out its mandated activities. On the Universal Periodic Review, high hopes were expressed that this mechanism would make a positive contribution to the promotion and protection of human rights.

KING BEE HSU (Malaysia) said Malaysia associated itself with the statements made by Cuba and Pakistan, on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, respectively. Malaysia appreciated some of the suggestions made by the High Commissioner for Human Rights in her update to the Council. At the same time, Malaysia recognized that Governments had also to take into account broader national interests, including that of the integrity and stability of their countries. Thus, Malaysia underlined the need for appropriate balance. Constructive engagement with Governments was fundamental for the effectiveness and success of such efforts.

Malaysia was pleased, too, that the Third Committee of the General Assembly had endorsed the Council's institution-building package, including the Code of Conduct for Special Procedures for mandate holders. In that connection, the importance of trust and confidence in the mechanism of Special Procedures if they were to function effectively had to be underlined. In her update, the High Commissioner had highlighted the relationship between the Council and her Office. Given the enhanced status and broader mandate of the Council, it was incumbent upon the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights that went beyond reporting on human rights thematic issues and country situations to issues such as the Office's programme activities and its strategic management plan.

DENIS CEPATAN (Philippines) said the Philippines had supported the cross-regional initiative in the General Assembly in support of a moratorium on the death penalty, and had now abolished the death penalty. Also, the ASEAN Charter had been signed, which committed the organization to create a human rights body.

It was noted that the High Commissioner for Human Rights was invited and given broad access to Sri Lanka this year, allowing broad consultation with government, political and civil society representatives. It was important to show the human rights violations committed by non-state actors in Sri Lanka. The Government had shown great good will in engaging constructively with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and needed the constructive support of the international community in its national endeavours, and the Human Rights Council and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights should work towards this end.

LEE SUK-TAE (Republic of Korea) said that the Republic of Korea supported a broader field presence as a crucial element to strengthen the Office of the High Commissioner. The future opening of the Regional Office for West Africa in Dakar was welcomed. The view that the human rights situations around the world called for the establishment of additional field presences was shared. The adoption of the ASEAN Charter was another remarkable step forward. Particular attention was paid to the High Commissioner’s visit to Sri Lanka and the cooperation with the Government was welcomed.

ROBERT JAN SIEBEN (Netherlands) said the Netherlands aligned itself with the statement made by Portugal on behalf of the European Union. Regarding the High Commissioner's observations on the human rights situation in Sri Lanka, the Netherlands had listened carefully to the intervention made by Sri Lanka. It understood the difficult situation in the country, but shared the opinion of the High Commissioner on the need for a strengthened field presence in that country.

The High Commissioner's recommendation was particularly important as the independent Group of Eminent Persons had handed in its resignation last week. That Group had been the last impartial, independent institution providing advice to Sri Lanka. The Netherlands regretted that the Group's recommendations had been rejected by the Sri Lankan Government, and that the Group had subsequently resigned. It was incumbent on the Government to ensure independent, public reporting in Sri Lanka by strengthening the presence of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in the country.

DANIEL VOSGIEN (France) said that France fully supported the statement made by Portugal on behalf of the European Union. The worsening situation and persistent human rights violations in Sri Lanka included the recruitment of child soldiers, kidnapping, forced disappearances and extra-judicial killings. It was deplorable that the Group of Eminent Persons had shed no light on the disappearances and assassinations, in particular the murder of 17 Sri Lankans who were working for the non-governmental organization, Action against Hunger.

The situation in Darfur was also of concern, and with the mandate of the Special Rapporteur and the Group of Experts on Darfur it was hoped that the Human Rights Council would have the means to act in the interests of the country and its population. The Zoe’s Ark incident would be established and dealt with through legal process, and should not be allowed to affect the actions of humanitarian organizations and non-governmental organizations in support of populations in need.

ABDOUL WAHAB HAIDARA (Senegal) welcomed the choice of the High Commissioner for hosting the Regional West African Office in Senegal. It was hoped that its activities would contribute to the improvement of the human rights situation in the region.

BLAISE GODET (Switzerland), speaking as the host State, expressed Switzerland's sincere condolences to the delegation of Algeria. Switzerland thanked the High Commissioner for Human Rights for her excellent report, and for the detailed information contained therein. On Sri Lanka, Switzerland would appreciate additional clarification from the High Commissioner, in particular with regard to the difference between the High Commissioner's proposals and those submitted by the Government, and what were the conditions necessary for a future presence of her Office to be set up there.

GUSTI AGUNG WESAKA PUJA (Indonesia) said that the High Commissioner’s report was an important barometer of the state of human rights around the world and provided valuable insight into the progress of countries in meeting their obligations to promote and protect human rights at all times. The High Commissioner was thanked for her visits to various countries and her dedication in this process. Efforts had been made by Sri Lanka to institute a constructive dialogue and the creation of a national protection system and support for this system from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights would no doubt pay off.

The Universal Periodic Review was ready to be finalized and at this crucial stage it was important to take advantage of the consultation process so that all aspects were fully aired and addressed. The Code of Conduct should contain all safeguards in order to preclude any error that might jeopardize the work of the Special Procedures.

HIROSHI MINAMI (Japan) said on the situation in Sri Lanka, the President of Japan had reiterated yesterday to the Government of Sri Lanka the importance of making efforts towards improvement of the human rights situation in the country. It was hoped that collaboration would continue between the Office of the High Commissioner and Sri Lanka. On Afghanistan, Japan had continued supporting the process of democratisation in that country.

BEATE STIRO (Norway) said that Norway remained concerned about the human rights situation in Afghanistan, and particularly about the indiscriminate attacks on civilians by insurgent groups. Norway deplored the attack in Baghlan which had killed 54 and injured over 80. While insurgent activities remained the most dangerous threat to Afghan civilians, the responsibility for upholding human rights in Afghanistan rested with the Government. The Afghan authorities had to treat detainees in accordance with international human rights standards. Norway had followed that up by entering into a bilateral agreement with the Afghan authorities on the treatment of detainees.

It was with deep regret that Norway learned about the execution of 15 Afghan nationals on 7 October. Norway opposed the death penalty in all cases, and had appealed to the Government of Afghanistan to halt any possible further executions. Support for national human rights institutions was crucial, and there was a continuous need to build Afghan national capacity to ensure that the Government could fulfil its responsibilities. The police and the justice system were obvious examples. The international community should assist with providing adequate training and funding for those institutions.

JOAN MOSLEY (New Zealand) welcomed the High Commissioner’s report on her visit to Sri Lanka, and shared her concern about the issue of abductions and disappearances and the inadequate investigation into the majority of these cases. The current status of the Sri Lankan Human Rights Commission and its failure to investigate adequately allegations of human rights abuses was a matter of concern, and it should return to operating in accordance with the Paris Principles for National Human Rights Institutions. It was no less important that the Commission of Inquiry be allowed to carry out its task effectively in order to ensure that there was no impunity for the individuals it was investigating. New Zealand was also pleased about the endorsement by the General Assembly of the institution-building package for the Human Rights Council. The Universal Periodic Review held the potential for an equitable assessment of the country human rights situations.

IDRISS JAZAÏRY (Algeria) thanked the delegations for their kind words on today’s terrorist attacks in Algeria. The use of terrorism by groups that said they were fighting in the name of human rights and were killing innocent victims was horrific. On the High Commissioner’s update, Algeria looked forward to have an opportunity to address the issues she had raised. It was noted that this update did not mention the situation in Iraq. And what about Palestine? Was there really no human right problem in those countries? It was wondered whether the opening of national and regional offices was also planned in developed countries. The readiness of the High Commissioner to accept, in her words, “the leadership” of the President of the Council in defining in a more transparent manner the relationship of the Council with her Office was welcomed.

MICHAEL S. KLECHESKI (United States) thanked High Commissioner Louise Arbour for her statement and emphasized the importance the United States placed on maintaining the independent activities of her Office. The United States welcomed the High Commissioner's comments on the grave violations of human rights and humanitarian law occurring in Sudan. The Council had the opportunity during this session to speak directly on the issues there. The United States hoped that the Council would renew the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Sudan and continue the work of the independent experts.

The United States also shared the High Commissioner's increasing concern about growing violence in Sri Lanka on all sides. The United States supported the Government of Sri Lanka as it grappled with a terrorist group, but had expressed its concerns about human rights violations and the lack of justice and accountability of the Government, emphasizing its deep concern about the rise in forced disappearances, torture and extrajudicial killings. The United States encouraged the Government to reconsider its rejection of an expanded mandate and staff for the Office of the High Commissioner in Colombo. Lastly, on the death penalty, the United States did not share the view that there was a "broad cross-regional agreement" on eliminating it. Rather, recent debate and action on the subject had been characterized by extraordinary acrimony and division. The United States hoped that future debate on this issue would avoid such divisiveness and focus on the need for countries to adhere to international legal standards.

MOHAMMED LOULICHKI (Morocco) said the High Commissioner’s presentation reflected her constant concern to report to the Human Rights Council on her activities in carrying out her mandate, and this interaction was of great significance, and should be consolidated and reinforced. The adoption of the institution-building package should ensure that this historical document kept its relevance. Morocco paid great attention to these mechanisms, in particular the Universal Periodic Review, which was the jewel in its crown, and would be one of the first countries to submit to the Review. Morocco was involved in two initiatives in this context, including an event on good practices in drafting country reports, with the aim of raising awareness in different States. The High Commissioner was thanked for her commitment in pursuing the process and continuing her interaction with the Council.

HANS DALHGREN (Sweden) welcomed the fact that the Government of Sri Lanka had facilitated the visit of the High Commissioner to the country. What was clear today was that the report confirmed that the situation in Sri Lanka was deteriorating. This needed urgent action to make sure that human rights were respected. Sri Lanka was urged to explore all possible ways to strengthen the respect of human rights in the present, difficult situation.

CURTIS DOEBBER, of North-South XXI, in a joint statement with the Union of Arab Jurists, said that, while they welcomed the report of the High Commissioner, and her attention to human rights around the world, they would like to draw attention to concerns that they hoped would be highlighted in the High Commissioner's activities during the coming months and which appeared to have received inadequate attention despite their serious nature. Iraq was the most serious human rights disaster in the world. Through a combination of use of massive military force, foreign occupation, and domestic neglect, more than 1 million Iraqis had been killed, an estimated 3 million had been internally displaced and an estimated 20 per cent of Iraqis – more than 4 million – could not live in their country. In addition, North South XXI hoped that the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the Human Rights Council would prioritize making an effective contribution to protecting the human rights of Palestinians – the longest-standing human rights tragedy which the OHCHR and the UN human rights mechanisms had ever confronted.

EMERLYNE GIL, of International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development, said the visit of the High Commissioner to Sri Lanka was welcomed. There was an urgent need for a strong presence of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Sri Lanka, considering that the existing institutions and mechanisms established by the Government had failed in their mandate to protect and promote human rights in the country. The Sri Lankan Human Rights Commission, for one, had been ineffective in protecting human rights defenders and had not been in compliance with the Paris Principles.

IQBAL HAIDER, of International Federation of Human Rights Leagues, expressed their deepest concern about the situation in Pakistan, which had witnessed a dramatic setback in the field of human rights. Several judges, journalists, lawyers, students and trade union leaders have been and still were detained, tortured or put under pressure. Also, several restrictions on the print media persisted. Several cases of enforced disappearances that had been pending before the Supreme Court were now not being heard. The planned elections could not be free and fair as long as the requests of the Pakistani civil society were not implemented. The Council was urged to take action.

SHAUKAT ALI-KASHMIRI, of Interfaith International, with reference to the situation in Pakistan, said that democracy activists there were suffering detention, persecution and torture in various prisons and many hundreds, if not thousands, of lawyers, political leaders, human rights activists, and even judges of the highest courts, were facing sedition charges. The Constitution had been suspended and the country placed under a state of emergency. Pakistan had become an epicentre of Islamic extremism, with various militant and terrorist groups finding not only shelter, but also enjoying the active support of the Pakistan Army and its intelligence agencies. Given the prevailing situation and the climate of instability in Pakistan, Interfaith International demanded the intervention of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the International Court of Justice and other United Nations bodies to establish an impartial tribunal to investigate and expose the extent of Dr. Qadeer Khan's illegal nuclear network.

PETER SPLINTER, of Amnesty International, said Amnesty International was deeply concerned that the arbitrary replacement of judges of the Superior Courts in Pakistan removed crucial safeguards against human rights violations and impunity for perpetrators at a time when they were needed most. Amnesty International shared the concern of the High Commissioner that even once the state of emergency was lifted, safeguards critical for the future protection of human rights in Pakistan had been seriously undermined for a long time to come. The Government of Sri Lanka appeared to lack the political will to enable Sri Lanka’s national mechanisms to meet the dire need of the people for the protection of their human rights.

LUKAS MACHON, of International Commission of Jurists, welcomed the discussions that had taken place between the High Commissioner and the Government of Sri Lanka about the options for establishing a field presence. National mechanisms in Sri Lanka were very weak. On Pakistan, grave concern was expressed about the attacks on the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. The dismissal of Supreme Court judges was deplored. Free and fair elections would not be possible in the current situation. The electoral process had to be overseen by an independent entity.

BASEER NAWEED, of Asian Legal Resource Centre, welcomed the statement made by High Commissioner Louise Arbour on the human rights situation in Pakistan. The Asian Legal Resource Centre was particularly shocked by the fact that a member of the Human Rights Council, notably one that was on the Consultative Group that would select future Special Procedures mandate holders, had arbitrarily detained Special Rapporteur Asma Jahangir and threatened Special Representative Hina Jilani with arrest if she returned to Pakistan. Furthermore, massive attacks on the independence and members of the judiciary would lead to grave longstanding damage to the enjoyment of democracy and human rights in the country. Currently, some 46 judges from the higher judiciary remained under house arrest; over 8,000 persons had been arrested following the state of emergency – including over 3,500 lawyers – and re-arrests continued. Many had been subject to torture in detention. The Asian Legal Resource Centre was of the view that Pakistan's actions required strong condemnation by the Council, that it should send a team of experts to look into the human rights violations in the country, that Pakistan should immediately be removed from the Special Procedures mandate-holders selection process, and that Pakistan be suspended from the Council.

JULIE DE RIVERO, of Human Rights Watch, said with the return of heavy fighting between the LTTE and Government forces, lack of protection for civilians remained a main concern in Sri Lanka. There were around 208,000 internally displaced persons in Sri Lanka. The High Commissioner had mentioned the failures and weakness of the national human rights mechanisms - and it was regretted that the Government had not accepted the establishment of a United Nations office with monitoring capabilities. The Council should indicate its support for the creation of a United Nations human rights monitoring mission, and encourage Sri Lanka to accept its establishment. The situation in Pakistan was also of concern. The Human Rights Council could not continue to ignore the situation.


Concluding Remarks

LOUISE ARBOUR, High Commissioner on Human Rights in concluding remarks, thanked speakers and the President of the Council for the condolences conveyed by the Council. Clarifying some points discussed today, she said that the update she had presented today had been a brief update of issues which her team had worked on since her last update. No references were made on Iraq, as there was already a quarterly report on the human rights situation in the country that was publicised by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq, with the support of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.


Right of Reply

RAJIVA WIJESINGHE (Sri Lanka), speaking in a right of reply, thanked delegations for the concern they had displayed concerning the situation in Sri Lanka. However, what they had here was perhaps a failure to understand the problems posed by terrorism. It should be stressed that, despite terrorism, Sri Lanka had done its best to cooperate. Indeed, it would welcome strengthened cooperation with international organizations. It was hoped that, following High Commissioner Arbour's visit, Sri Lanka would receive the technical assistance that it had been asking for for a long time now.

It was not true, as had been asserted by the Netherlands, that Sri Lanka had dissolved the Group of Eminent Persons, it had extended the mandate of that body a month ago. The progress of the Sri Lankan Government in trying to resolve problems should be recognized. Also, while there had been many civilian deaths, a close investigation would show that the vast majority of them were owing to terrorist actions. To work effectively with the Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights to strengthen its national human rights institutions, it was important that there be an accurate understanding of the situation, to do so effectively.

SAAD FATHALLAH (Iraq), speaking in a right of reply, said Iraq thanked the High Commissioner for her concern, and wished to assure her that Iraq was continuing to seek to improve the human rights situation. The Minister for Human Rights had invited Ms. Arbour to visit Iraq and see for herself the situation of human rights. The Ministry had cooperated with all other Ministries in order to celebrate the fifty-ninth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and was working to spread a culture of human rights among all citizens. By next year, Iraq would sign the Convention against Torture, and the Special Rapporteur on Torture would visit the country, proof of the improvement of the situation of human rights, and the Government’s determination to continue this. An independent Commission on Human Rights would be set up in 2008, in accordance with the Paris Principles, to monitor the state of human rights.

ROBERT JAN SIEBEN (Netherlands), speaking in a right of reply, on the Group of Eminent Persons, said that the Government of the Netherlands had received a copy of a letter sent by the Group of Eminent Persons to the President of Sri Lanka. This latter said that the members of the Group would resign by early 2008, feeling that they were not able to contribute to Sri Lanka’s policy making.

DAYAN JAYATILLEKA (Sri Lanka), speaking in a right of reply, said that the spin had to stop somewhere. He read out a letter signed by the Chairman of the Group of Eminent Persons. "After careful deliberation ... on 16 November the [Group] is of the opinion that it is approaching the end of its useful work", he read. In the letter, the Group said that its two previous reports had already highlighted a number of shortcomings of the investigation commission, and these were listed. The letter ended by saying that "it is in the interest of [the Group] to conclude the mandate at the end of March 2008". It was hardly an abrupt resignation.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC07082E