HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL EXTENDS MANDATES OF EXPERTS ON ADEQUATE HOUSING, PROTECTING RIGHTS WHILE COUNTERING TERRORISM, RIGHT TO HEALTH, LIBERIA
The Human Rights Council this morning decided to extend for three years the mandates of the Special Rapporteurs on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, and on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health for a period of three years, and extended for one year the mandate of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Liberia.
The Council also adopted texts in which it decided invite the High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations to address the Council at its seventh session; called upon all relevant actors to implement a General Assembly resolution on improvement of the status of women in the United Nations system; and initiated a process to elaborate a set of voluntary human rights goals.
All seven resolutions and decisions were adopted without a vote.
At the beginning of the meeting, the Council concluded its discussion on the review, rationalization and improvement of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan.
On the assessment of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan, delegations said, among other things, that the grave humanitarian and human rights situation in Sudan was a matter of preoccupation for the whole international community. It was a complex situation, resulting from Sudan’s colonial past and it could not be settled by punitive actions. One speaker said that Special Procedures should not be imposed on a country and that the sovereignty of States should be respected when choosing a mechanism.
Egypt, speaking on behalf of the African Group, in concluding remarks, considered that the review, rationalization and improvement process had not focused adequately on the nature of the mandate. Statements had focused in fact on the situation in Sudan rather than on the functioning of the mandate. It was surprising that the Special Rapporteur was not in attendance, as it was assumed that she would have been interested to respond to comments. The Special Rapporteur was called upon to pay greater attention to this process in the future.
Speaking in the context of the review of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur were Switzerland, Canada, Zambia, Russian Federation, Ghana, Ireland, United States, Norway, Sweden, Argentina, Algeria, Tunisia, Iraq, Morocco and Egypt on behalf of the African Group.
Also speaking, were representatives of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, in a joint statement with the National Consultative Commission of France, the German Institute for Human Rights, the National Human Rights Commission of Algeria, the Kenya National Commission for Human Rights of Rwanda; International Federation of Human Rights Leagues;United Nations Watch; Amnesty International; Human Rights Watch; Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies; Sudan Council of Voluntary Agencies (SCOVA); and the African-American Society for Humanitarian Aid and Development.
While taking action on texts, speaking in introductory remarks, general comments and explanation of vote were Brazil, Slovenia on behalf of the European Union, Cuba, Turkey, Spain, Pakistan, Germany, Mexico, Brazil, Chile, South Africa, Pakistan, Russia, India, Egypt, Portugal on behalf of the European Union and Egypt on behalf of the African Group.
When the Council meets this afternoon at 3 p. m., it is scheduled to take action on the remaining draft resolutions and decisions before closing its resumed sixth session.
Action on Resolution on Elaboration of Human Rights Voluntary Goals
In a resolution (A/HRC/6/L.36/Rev.1) on the elaboration of human rights voluntary goals to be launched on the occasion of the celebration of the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to initiate an open-ended intergovernmental process in order to elaborate, on a consensual basis, a set of human rights voluntary goals, to promote the realization and implementation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in accordance with States’ international human rights obligations and commitments to be launched on 10 December 2008 during the celebration of the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; also decides to that end to invite States to refer to the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration and to human rights voluntary goals at the High-level Segment of the Human Rights Council at its session in March 2008, and to hold a panel with the aim of exchanging views on the issue of human rights voluntary goals at that session; decides to consider the results of the open-ended intergovernmental process in elaborating a set of human rights voluntary goals to be submitted to the Human Rights Council, on a consensual basis, through a draft resolution, by its session in September 2008; and encourages States and all relevant stakeholders to present to the Council, during the commemoration process, the projects and activities undertaken at the national, regional and international levels on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration.
SERGIO ABREU E LIMA FLORENCIO (Brazil), speaking in introduction of draft resolution L. 36, said all groups had understood from the beginning of the process of consultation that the basic purpose of the proposal was constructive, and aimed at enhancing the human rights system. Countries from many regions were in support of the resolution. Italy had been a key player in the whole consultation process - its wisdom was essential in bringing together many other actors into the process. Brazil hoped that it could count on the constructive participation of all countries in the formulation of human rights voluntary goals after the adoption of the resolution. The constructive engagement of all was essential to strengthen human rights. By approving the resolution, the Human Rights Council was giving a concrete demonstration of its capacity to act in the same spirit of inclusiveness which inspired the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 59 years ago.
ANDREJ LOGAR (Slovenia), speaking on behalf of the European Union in a general comment, said that the European Union had recognised the importance of this resolution since the beginning and that it had made suggestions on several points. The concept of human rights voluntary goals left not doubt that it would not be used as a means of imposing new standards. This process should also work in collaboration with non-state actors.
RESFEL PINO (Cuba), in a general comment, thanked the sponsors of the resolution and the broad negotiations during its drafting. At this time of the commemoration of the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the value of the Declaration was recognized as a founding document for the development of further instruments. However, there were gaps in the Declaration, such as the lack of the right to development, and there was continuing work to address these gaps. Cuba would continue to try to work in a constructive and committed way to achieve these ends.
Action on Decision on Alliance of Civilizations
In a decision (A/HRC/6/L.37) on the Alliance of Civilizations, adopted without a vote, the Council invites the High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations Jorge Sampaio to address the Council at the High-level Segment of its seventh session on the ongoing activities within the framework of the Alliance and particularly on the outcome of its first annual forum and the level of progress achieved regarding the implementation plan for the period 2007-2009.
AHMET UZUMCU (Turkey), introducing draft resolution L.37, said the Alliance of Civilizations project was launched in 2004 at the initiative of the Governments of Spain and Turkey under the auspices of the United Nations Secretary-General. This project aimed to facilitate the establishment of contacts and dialogue in order to build bridges across different cultures and groups of countries. The Alliance of Civilizations Secretariat would work in partnership with States, international and regional organizations, civil society groups, foundations, and the private sector to promote cross-cultural relations. It would encourage countries or groups of countries to work in harmony while respecting diversity. The implementation plan of the Alliance contained elements which were of direct interest to the work of the Council.
JUAN ANTONIO MARCH (Spain) welcomed the creation of the Alliance of Civilizations. It would improve dialogue between civilizations. Spain would host the first forum of the Alliance. This Forum would bring various actors together, including civil society and the media. It would be interesting for the Human Rights Council seventh session to hear the results of the Forum.
TEHMINA JANJUA (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said the OIC firmly believed that differences within and between societies should never be a cause of confrontation between States and nations. Turkey and Spain were thanked for bringing this draft to the Council. The Organisation of the Islamic Conference had endorsed the draft decision.
It was important to promote understanding, particularly between Islam and the West. Efforts included the initiative of the Dialogue among Civilizations and the Strategy of Enlightened Moderation. The Council’s decision to invite the High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations to address the seventh session was supported.
Action on Resolution on Mandate of Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing
In a resolution (A/HRC/6/L.41) on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to extend for a period of three years the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, in order to, inter alia, promote the full realization of adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living; identify best practices as well as challenges and obstacles to the full realization of the right to adequate housing, and identify protection gaps in this regard; give particular emphasis to practical solutions with regard to the implementation of the rights relevant to the mandate; apply a gender perspective in relation to the right to adequate housing and land; facilitate the provision of technical assistance; work in close cooperation, while avoiding unnecessary duplication, with other special procedures and subsidiary organs of the Council, relevant United Nations bodies, the treaty bodies and regional human rights mechanisms; submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution to the General Assembly at its sixty-third session and to the Council in 2008, in accordance with its annual programme of work; and invites the outgoing Special Rapporteur to submit to the Council at its seventh session a comprehensive final report on his findings, conclusions and recommendations.
BIRGITTA MARIA SIEFKER (Germany), introducing draft resolution L. 41, said the resolution called for the extension of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing for three years. It was based on earlier resolutions on the issue, but was also a successor to resolution 2005/25 focusing on the issue of women’s equal ownership of, access to, and control over land and the equal rights to won property and to adequate housing. These two initiatives were now going to be combined into one, thereby responding to the call for the rationalisation of mandates. It was hoped that the positive atmosphere that had been created towards the end of the negotiations would lead to an adoption by consensus of the draft resolution including the proposed oral amendments.
Action on Resolution on Mandate of Special Rapporteur on Protecting Human Rights While Countering Terrorism
In a resolution (A/HRC/6/L.43) on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism: mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism for a period of three years and requests the Special Rapporteur, inter alia, to make concrete recommendations on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, including for the provision of advisory services or technical assistance on such matters; to gather, request, receive and exchange information and communications from and with all relevant sources, including through country visits, on alleged violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, with special attention to areas not covered by existing mandate-holders; to integrate a gender perspective throughout the work of the mandate; to identify, exchange and promote best practices on measures to counter terrorism that respect human rights and fundamental freedoms; to work in close coordination with other relevant bodies and mechanisms of the United Nations, avoiding unnecessary duplication of efforts; to develop a regular dialogue and discuss possible areas of cooperation with Governments and all relevant actors, including, inter alia with the Counter-Terrorism Committee of the Security Council, and the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, as well as non-governmental organizations and other regional or sub regional international institutions, while respecting the scope of the mandate and the respective mandates of the above-mentioned bodies and with a view to avoiding duplication of effort; and to report regularly to the Human Rights Council and to the General Assembly.
LUIS ALFONSO DE ALBA (Mexico), introducing draft resolution L.43, on the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on protecting human rights while countering terrorism, said that in light of the support given to the Special Rapporteur during the review of his mandate, the co-sponsors were convinced of the need to extend the Special Rapporteur’s mandate for another period of three years. This resolution was considering changes that had occurred in the world since the creation of the mandate and updated its scope of responsibilities. The renewal of this mandate was seen as important for the protection of human rights.
Action on Resolution on Mandate of Special Rapporteur on Right to Health
In a resolution (A/HRC/6/L.44) on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health for a further period of three years. The mandate of the Special Rapporteur shall include the following tasks, inter alia: to develop a regular dialogue and discuss possible areas of cooperation with all relevant actors, in particular the World Health Organization and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS; to report on the status, throughout the world, of the realization of the right to health; to make recommendations on appropriate measures to promote and protect the realization of the right to health; and to submit an annual report to the Council and an interim report to the General Assembly on its activities, findings, conclusions and recommendations. The Council encourages the Special Rapporteur, in fulfilling the mandate, inter alia, to continue to explore how efforts to realize the right to health can reinforce poverty reduction strategies; to continue the analysis of the human rights dimensions of the issues of neglected diseases and diseases particularly affecting developing countries; to continue to apply a gender perspective in her/his work and to pay special attention to the needs of children and other vulnerable and marginalized groups; to pay due attention to the rights of persons with disabilities; to continue to pay attention to sexual and reproductive health as an integral element of the right to health; to continue to avoid in her/his work any duplication or overlapping with the work, competence and mandate of other international bodies active in health issues; and to submit proposals that could help the realization of the health-related Millennium Development Goals.
SERGIO ABREU E LIMA FLORENCIO (Brazil), in introductory remarks, said Brazil had been the main sponsor of the resolution on the right to health that established the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, which was then renewed in 2004. Wide cross-regional support was counted on from Member States and civil society bodies. It was firmly believed that the right to the highest attainable standard of health was an essential component of the realization of all other human rights. Adoption of the resolution on a consensual basis was expected as it was of the utmost importance to maintain the mandate. Full enjoyment of the right to the highest attainable standard of health still remained a distant goal, especially for those living in poverty.
Action on Resolution on Mainstreaming Women’s Rights in the United Nations System
In a resolution (A/HRC/6/L.32/Rev.1) on integrating the human rights of women throughout the United Nations system, adopted without a vote as orally amended, the Council calls upon all relevant actors to implement General Assembly resolution 59/164 of 20 December 2004 on the improvement of the status of women in the United Nations system, in order to realize significant progress towards the goal of fifty/fifty gender distribution in the very near future and to guarantee the full participation of women in higher levels of decision-making in the Organization; requests all Special Procedures and other human rights mechanisms of the Council and the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee regularly and systematically to integrate a gender perspective into the implementation of their mandate including when examining the intersection of multiple forms of discrimination against women and to include in their reports information on and qualitative analysis of human rights of women and girls; decides to incorporate into its programme of work sufficient and adequate time, at minimum an annual full-day meeting, to discuss the human rights of women, including measures that can be adopted by States and other stakeholders, to address human rights violations experienced by women; also decides that the first such meeting should take place in the first half of 2008 and that it should include a discussion on violence against women, as mandated by the General Assembly in resolution 61/143 of 19 December 2006; decides to incorporate into its programme of work an annual discussion on the integration of a gender perspective throughout its work and that of its mechanisms, including the evaluation of progress made and challenges experienced; and requests the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to report in 2008 on the obstacles and challenges to the implementation of this resolution by the Human Rights Council and to make concrete recommendations for action to address such obstacles and challenges.
JUAN MARTABIT (Chile), introducing draft resolution L.32/Rev.1, said the purpose of this resolution was to make progress towards the fulfilment of a commitment which would lead to dignity for women, men, and all people in the world. This principle was contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The background of the resolution was to be found in a resolution which was adopted from time to time by the Commission, and the resolution should therefore be seen in the framework of the General Assembly’s intents for the Council to continue the work of the Commission.
The Council had an institutional status that was greater than that of the earlier Commission, as it was an organ directly related to the United Nations General Assembly and enjoyed the same status as the Economic and Social Council. This strengthened the legitimacy, effectiveness and credibility of the international system for the protection of human rights. In the presentation and content of the resolution, there was explicit mandate on political compliance with human rights by States, and ensuring follow-up to commitments on the protection and promotion of human rights made at Conferences and Summits made by the United Nations, including the Beijing Programme and Platform of Action. The draft also reflected the joint statement made by 57 Members of the Council in March 2007.
PITSO MONTWEDI (South Africa), in a general comment on Resolution L.32/Rev.1, paid tribute to the prominent and decisive role played by women in the liberation of South Africa. Promotion, protection and fulfilment of women’s rights as well as the socio-economic empowerment of women had been placed at the very top of the agenda of the Government of South Africa. They did not only speak on this topic from deep conviction but also from practical experience. South Africa was concerned about this resolution, as several paragraphs took the Council down wrong paths. It gave powers to the Council that it clearly did not possess, and stepped on mandates of other United Nations processes. If it would be voted on, South Africa would vote against some of the paragraphs that were contradicting the mandate of the Council. If passed by consensus, South Africa would reserve its position on all the paragraphs it had difficulties with.
TEHMINA JANJUA (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, appreciated that the draft resolution would be adopted by consensus and welcomed the efforts of the Human Rights Council to protect the rights of women and prevent all forms of violence or discrimination against women. Mainstreaming of women’s rights in the United Nations had been dealt with by the Economic and Social Council and other existing bodies. Further guidance was requested from the Council about the work of the proposed gender unit. Points made by South Africa should be taken into account.
OLEG MALGINOV (Russian Federation), in a general comment, said the Russian Federation agreed with the comments made by the representatives of South Africa and Pakistan for the Organization of the Islamic Conference, and also thought that a number of the provisions in the resolution weakened the mandate of the Human Rights Council, and, to a certain extent, did not correspond to other mandates that existed in the United Nations system. The Russian Federation would not break consensus, but reserved the right in the future to return to specific provisions of the resolution so as to bring them into alignment with other texts of the Human Rights Council.
MUNU MAHAWAR (India), in a general comment, said that India attached great importance to the integration of women’s rights. The resolution did not address some of India’s concerns. But as India supported this topic, it would join the consensus.
OMAR SHALABY (Eqypt), speaking in a general comment, expressed serious reservations about the scope of the resolution. The Human Rights Council had not been fully briefed on the nature of the work of the proposed gender unit. Egypt agreed with the comments of South Africa and India and noted that these issues would be returned to.
Action on Resolution on Mandate of Independent Expert on Liberia
In a resolution (A/HRC/6/L.45) on advisory services and technical assistance for Liberia, adopted without a vote as orally amended, the Council decides to extend by one year the mandate of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Liberia; requests that the Independent Expert ensures that her work complements that of the United Nations Mission in Liberia; invites the Independent Expert to assist the Government of Liberia to identify opportunities to maximize the flow of technical assistance; and invites the Independent Expert to submit a final report on the effectiveness and efficiency of the measures applied in practice to the Council at its ninth session.
CARLOS PEREIRA MARQUES, (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union, introducing draft resolution L.45, said the European Union had listened carefully to the views of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Liberia, the Ambassador of Liberia, and others, and noted the wish of the Government of Liberia that the mandate be extended, and that the Human Rights Council continue to work to support the improvement of human rights in the country. It was to support these objectives that the European Union presented for adoption the resolution, as it had the following purpose: to extend the mandate of the Independent Expert for one year; to ask the mandate holder to work with the Government to enhance the flow of technical assistance to support the improvement of the human rights situation; and to ask the Independent Expert to present a final report to the Human Rights Council at its ninth session. The European Union hoped the text would be adopted by consensus.
OMAR SHALABY (Egypt) speaking in a general comment on behalf of the African Group, said that the African Group had always been of the view that dialogue and open collaboration were the only way that improvement could be achieved in human rights but also by listening to the wishes of the countries in question. Thus, the African Group did not oppose the renewal of the mandate.
General Debate on Review of Mandate of Special Rapporteur on Situation of Human Rights in Sudan
BLAISE GODET (Switzerland) said the situation of human rights in Sudan was not confined to the grave situation in Darfur. Since 1993, the Commission and now the Council had been considering human rights throughout Sudan. Despite this, the recommendations by the international community had been only very partially followed by the Sudanese authorities. Sima Samar, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan, had painted an eloquent picture of the situation of human rights in the country: fundamental freedoms were guaranteed nowhere. The appointment by the Sudanese authorities of an individual for whom an arrest warrant had been issued by the International Criminal Court to lead the mission of inquiry into the situation of human rights in Darfur was not encouraging.
The task awaiting the Special Rapporteur on Sudan was enormous. The mandate holder could count on the support of Switzerland, which supported the renewal of the mandate.
MARIUS GRINIUS (Canada) said that it was important to continue to draw attention to the current difficulties in protecting human rights in Sudan, and that was why it was important to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur. The Special Rapporteur had fulfilled an important role in efforts to improve the situation. The report noted current obstacles to promoting human rights in Sudan, including persistent and flagrant human rights violations, perpetrated by all parties in the conflict. It also drew attentions to precise problems such as arbitrary detention, flaws in the legal system, and failure to prosecute perpetrators.
The National Human Rights Commission needed to promptly implement relevant resolutions. Also of international concern was the need to maintain focus on human rights abuses elsewhere in the country, and the Special Rapporteur has a mandate to conduct field visits not only in Darfur. Adopting the draft resolution by consensus would be an important signal, indicating that it was essential to address human rights issues where it mattered most, on the ground.
JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba) said that the grave humanitarian and human rights situation in Sudan was a matter of preoccupation for the whole international community. It was a complex situation, resulting from Sudan’s colonial past. It could not be settled by punitive actions. The Group of Experts on Darfur had expressed and acknowledged the open and constructive dialogue it had had with the Sudanese Government. This showed that the resolutions taken by the Council could have results only when collaborating fully with the Sudanese Government. Thus, Cuba supported the mandate of the Special Rapporteur.
SINDISO N. KANKASA (Zambia) said Zambia noted with concern that a lot still remained to be done to ensure enjoyment of all human rights by the people of Sudan in general, and the Darfur region in particular. Zambia encouraged the Government of Sudan to implement the recommendations of the Group of Experts and the Special Rapporteur by undertaking programmes and activities that would enhance the enjoyment of human rights on the ground. Zambia also called on the international community to continue assisting Sudan in its efforts to meet its international and regional human rights obligations. Zambia supported the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan, as this would ensure that the situation of human rights in that country was not forgotten.
YURI BOICHENKO (Russian Federation) said the Russian Federation regretted that the Special Rapporteur was unable to be present, and thus the discussion was a virtual one. It was important to settle matters in the framework of country mechanisms. In the Human Rights Council, the country mechanisms had always been considered to be important in the drafting or adoption of resolutions. Decisions should be reached by consensus so that all countries and parties could be involved.
The mandate had resulted in a very open dialogue and the Special Rapporteur had cooperated closely with the African Union. The situation in Darfur was contradictory and complex. More attention should be paid to positive improvements and efforts made by the Government of Sudan. The South of Sudan was not a simple situation either and merited further international attention. The Coordinator of the African Group had asked some important questions. The Russian Federation also wanted to know how the Special Rapporteur intended to strengthen the mandate linked to Sudan’s needs so that there could be an improvement in human rights.
KWABENA BAAH-DUODU (Ghana) said the work of the Special Procedures was an important aspect of the Human Rights Council, and should be encouraged in order to enable the Council to fulfil its mandate under Resolution 60/251. In this regard, Ghana wished to express deep satisfaction with the consensual outcome of deliberations on the resolution of the reform, rationalisation and improvement of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan, and hoped that the one year extension to the mandate would allow the Special Rapporteur to assist the Government of Sudan to attain a remarkable improvement in the human rights situation on the ground and foster a more conducive atmosphere that ensured peace and security in the region. Ghana looked forward in earnest to the day when Sudan would no longer remain an item on the agenda of the Human Rights Council.
MICHEAL TIERNEY (Ireland) said Ireland believed that the auditing mechanism the Special Rapporteur provided could function as a confidence-building measure in the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. The improved implementation of that agreement would be in the interests of all the people of Sudan, and, in that regard, Ireland regretted the lack of progress in the establishment of the National Human Rights Institution and in the overall process of legal reform. The potential of the Peace Agreement had not yet been exploited properly, and Ireland believed that the extension of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur was an important requirement in securing more substantial progress.
The Government of Sudan also needed to do more to tackle impunity in order to improve the situation of human rights throughout Sudan. The suffering of the people of Darfur could not be ignored by the Council. The value of work would be measured by evidence of a tangible improvement in the human rights situation on the ground. This would require a commitment to re-invigorate the Darfur Peace Agreement. This would require the implementation of the measures that had been skilfully set out by the Darfur Group of Experts.
WARREN W. TICHENOR (United States) said that the Council had to remain resolved to end the suffering and violence in Darfur. Too many had died. Country-specific mandates played a critical role in addressing the human rights situations throughout the world. The plight of the Sudanese people still urgently demanded a watchful eye and a helping hand from the Council. The Special Rapporteur had played an important role. It was imperative to renew the mandate. Failure to do so would fly in the face of the very reason for the Council’s existence.
VEBJORN HEINES (Norway) said the human rights situation in Sudan had been high on the agenda of the Commission on Human Rights for a decade and continued to be an important issue for the Council. Since the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement there had been many improvements. The new national government and the parliament had adopted several laws and provisions in this respect. There had been a gradual opening of the press and media and there was more room for political activity and preparations for elections.
On the other hand, the war in Darfur had grave bearings on the human rights situation for the population in western Sudan. The situation in the east of Sudan also continued to be of concern. It was of the utmost importance that the Government intensified its efforts to improve the human rights situation in both these areas. The Special Rapporteur could play an important and positive role as monitor and advisor and Norway strongly supported the extension of the mandate.
HANS DAHLGREN (Sweden) said Sweden commended the work of the Special Rapporteur, and greatly appreciated the broad attention she had given in her report to human rights violations in different parts of Sudan. Sweden had some questions regarding the mandate: how would she assess developments in addressing impunity since she submitted her report, and what did she foresee would be the main human rights issues that would continue to require the attention of her mandate and the Government of Sudan in Eastern Sudan in the period ahead; what had she understood since her report as regarded efforts by the authorities to bring justice in response to the reported incidents of excessive violence against demonstrators and arbitrary arrests, and was she aware of any further developments with regard to allegations of forced displacement; what measures would she foresee as the most effective to address the issues of forced marriages and violence against women, what steps by the authorities was she aware of in this regard; and how did her mandate interact with thematic mandates of the Human Rights Council, for instance the Special Rapporteur on violence against women or other United Nations mechanisms.
SEBASTIAN ROSALES (Argentina) said that the last report to the General Assembly by the Special Rapporteur had stated that violence had increased in the region and she had urged the parties to respect humanitarian and human rights laws. Argentina supported the continuation of the mandate and hoped that the mandate holder could help improve the situation in Darfur.
MOHAMMED BESSEDIK (Algeria) stressed that Special Procedures should not be imposed on a country. The sovereignty of States should be respected when choosing a mechanism. The cooperation of the Government with the Special Rapporteur and the Human Rights Council were highlighted. There had been real improvements in the situation, including the return of 400,000 people to their homes.
The Special Rapporteur had not paid full attention to the economic, social and cultural situation in the county in her report. It was important to avoid selectivity when it came to human rights. The international community was called upon to fulfil its financial obligations if it really wanted to help Sudan. On the subject of technical assistance, was the Special Rapporteur able to reconcile her mandate with being chair of the Group of Experts. This could be said to involve a possible conflict of interests.
ALI CHERIF (Tunisia) said the report gave an opportunity to address the development of the situation of human rights in the field in Sudan, including the positive developments which were beginning now, and the willingness of the authorities to move forward, which deserved the support and aid of the international community. There was a positive trend, with a view to ensuring better protection and promotion of human rights in Sudan.
OMER BERZINJI (Iraq) said that Iraq encouraged stability anywhere in the world, especially in Sudan. The signing of the peace agreements was welcomed. Collaboration between the Human Rights Council and Sudan was encouraged.
MOHAMMED LOULICHKI (Morocco) said Morocco would have liked the Special Rapporteur to have attended the meeting, which was considering the review, rationalization and improvement of her mandate. The Group of Experts was thanked for their report and recommendations on ways to ensure the promotion of human rights in Sudan. The Government of Sudan had confirmed its willingness to consider the recommendations and had made improvements in the situation. The international community was called upon to fulfil its obligations to all parties and to support peace efforts. The cooperation of all parties was noted in building consensus for the extension of the mandate.
KATHARINA ROSE, of Canadian Human Rights Commission, in a joint statement with the National Consultative Commission of France, the German Institute for Human Rights, the National Human Rights Commission of Algeria, the Kenya National Commission for Human Rights of Rwanda, said when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was proclaimed 59 years ago, it was needed due to the disregard and contempt for human rights which had resulted in barbarous acts which had outraged the conscience of mankind. Council members should redouble their efforts to ensure that never again would the conscience of mankind be outraged by acts which the international community had the power to prevent and redress. The rights, dignity and very existence of the people of the Darfur region had been violated, and continued to be threatened in a widespread pattern of impunity. The mandate of the Special Rapporteur should therefore be renewed, and the Council should ensure that the mandate holder had the mandate to play a leadership role in cooperation with the Government in identifying the various instruments that could transform the human rights situation in Sudan.
AMIR SULEIMAN, of International Federation of Human Rights, urged the Council to maintain and support the mandate of the Special Rapporteur. As noted by the Special Rapporteur, the legislative reform was seriously behind schedule and laws which violated the Constitution and human rights standards were still in use. The authorities systematically interfered with freedom of expression. Practices like arbitrary detention and torture were common. The Special Rapporteur was a crucial way of giving a voice to Sudanese people. Darfur remained a major area of grave concern. The recommendations of the Group of Experts had not been implemented. The mandate of the Special Rapporteur should be supported.
TOBY FRANKENSTEIN, of United Nations Watch, asked why so many Member States of the United Nations’ highest human rights body were trying to do away with scrutiny of Sudan’s atrocities in Darfur? Why did Egypt describe an improving situation and call for the elimination of some or all of the experts? Why did Algeria call to bring the work of the Group of Experts to an end? The Council was urged not to let down the victims of Darfur.
KRISZTINA HUSZTI-ORBAN, of Amnesty International, said while the situation in Darfur had already commanded the attention of the Council, the human rights situation in other parts of Sudan was also serious, and was deteriorating in some places. Independent observers continued to receive credible reports of serious human rights violations in regions of Sudan beyond Darfur, including continued arbitrary arrest, and prolonged incommunicado detention, torture, and impunity. The right to freedom of expression was also frequently violated. These grave violations made it clear that the Council should continue to monitor the human rights situation throughout Sudan. Maintenance of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur would convey to the victims of human rights violations the United Nations’ continued concern about the crying need to improve the human rights situation in the country.
SEBASTIEN GILLIOZ, of Human Rights Watch, said that serious abuses had occurred and continued to persist in Sudan. Continuing scrutiny of the Special Rapporteur was essential. There were critical human rights concerns in Sudan. Women’s rights were frequently violated across the country. The Special Rapporteur could act as a form of early warning in a case of a dramatic deterioration of Sudan’s human rights situation, as had had been the case in 1990, when the situation in Darfur unfolded. The Council was strongly urged to extend the mandate.
JEREMIE SMITH, of Cairo Institute for Human Rights, said that the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan has served an important function that was complementary but distinct from that of the Group of Experts. Neither mandate should be weakened. Subsuming the Group of Experts under the Sudan Country Mandate at this time would send the wrong message to millions of destitute internally displaced persons and victims of violence in Darfur, and would embolden and encourage the Sudanese Government in its efforts to provide domestic and international impunity for war crimes and crimes against humanity carried out in its territory.
MOHAMED EL GHEABI, Sudan Council of Voluntary Agencies (SCOVA), said the Sudan Council of Voluntary Agencies supported the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Sudan. In Sudan, the Government should not censor any newspapers. There had been slaughter of pressmen and journalists. The Special Rapporteur had not spoken of human rights violations in areas under the control of armed groups, which caused socio-economic distress. The Special Rapporteur had not referred to the abduction of Sudanese children. The Special Rapporteur should focus on a national human rights institution in Sudan. The Council and the Special Rapporteur, due to the complexity of Sudan’s problem, should continue contact with the armed forces and the Government, as this would yield positive results. The problem of children who were abducted by a French NGO should not be ignored, and the Sudanese prisoners in Guantanamo should be released.
ABOZER ELMANA, of African-American Society for Humanitarian Aid and Development, referred to the reports that clearly indicated the unlimited cooperation of Sudan with the Special Rapporteur and the Group of Experts. The Africa-American Society expressed huge concern about the international community’s readiness and preparedness to provide assistance in a timely manner to implement the Council’s recommendations. Civil society was doing excellent work in Darfur. The international community was called upon to approach the issue with neutrality.
Concluding Remarks
SAMEH SHOUKRY (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the African Group in concluding remarks on the discussion, considered that the review, rationalization and improvement process had not focused adequately on the nature of the mandate. Statements had focused in fact on the situation in Sudan rather than on the functioning of the mandate. It was realized that the formulation of a specific and well-defined process of assessment upon which the Council would be in a position to take a conscious decision related to the mandate was a work in progress.
It was surprising that the Special Rapporteur was not in attendance, as it was assumed that she would have been interested to respond to the comments. The Special Rapporteur was called upon to pay greater attention to this process in the future. The assessment by the Council of the mandate was clearly incomplete, but it was assumed, given the consensus achieved with regard to the two draft resolutions on Sudan, that the review process had now been completed, albeit in theory.
For use of the information media; not an official record
HRC07089E