COUNCIL HOLDS INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE WITH EXPERTS ON ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES, ARBITRARY DETENTION, AND INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS

The Human Rights Council this afternoon held a clustered interactive dialogue with Jeremy Sarkin, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances, El Hadji Malick Sow, Chairperson of the Working Group on arbitrary detention, and Chaloka Beyani, Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons.

Jeremy Sarkin, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances, said that since its creation, the Working Group had transmitted 53,337 individual cases to Governments in all regions of the world. Over the past five years, the Working Group had clarified 1,814 cases. Much work therefore remained to be done. Enforced disappearances remained a global problem occurring worldwide and, in particular, in States suffering from internal conflict. Thousands of cases of disappearances remained unclarified and consequently, they remained continuous crimes. The Working Group drew attention to the underreporting of disappearance cases in all regions of the world including Africa. The phenomenon occurred for various reasons, including poverty, illiteracy, fear of reprisals, weak administration of justice, ineffective reporting channels, institutionalized systems of impunity, a practice of silence, restrictions on the work of civil society and unfortunately a lack of awareness about the Working Group and its mandate.

El Hadji Malick Sow, Chairperson of the Working Group on arbitrary detention, noted that in 2010 the Working Group had paid particular attention to arbitrary detention in connection with armed conflict and in this regard the International Criminal Court had confirmed the applicability of international human rights law and international humanitarian law in situations of armed conflicts. The Geneva Conventions and their Optional Protocols sought to achieve the same objectives as international human rights law, namely protection of human rights, and it was imperative for all governments to respect the international norms not only in times of peace, but also in times of armed conflict. The Working Group believed that no State should secretly deprive a human being of their freedom. Secret detention was a form of enforced disappearance and if applied systematically could constitute a crime against humanity. The Working Group had sent 102 urgent appeals to a number of governments concerning almost 3,000 persons and welcomed the freeing of three individuals, in Ethiopia, Viet Nam and Myanmar. A number of cases submitted by the Working Group concerned children.

Chaloka Beyani, Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, said it was estimated that 50 million persons were displaced by natural disasters in any given year and that many millions would be forcibly displaced due to the effects of climate change in the coming decades. The recognition of climate change-induced displacement in the Cancun agreement represented an important step forward and a constructive platform from which to develop normative standards and strengthen collaborative efforts. A further objective of the Special Rapporteur’s mandate was to support the follow-up processes related to the ratification and implementation of the Kampala Convention, which represented a major achievement by African Union Member States to protect and assist internally displaced persons. The issue of women and internal displacement required focused attention to mainstream their rights in the United Nations system. Regarding the response to internally displaced persons living outside camps and settlements, the Special Rapporteur said the response to these situations remained largely ad hoc and that it would be important to look into good practices which already existed among a number of organizations.

Bosnia and Herzegovina, Armenia, Malaysia, and Iraq spoke as concerned countries.
During the interactive dialogue regarding enforced or involuntary disappearances, speakers said the right to truth was extremely important and was critical to the victims of enforced disappearances and their families. The right to truth was an autonomous right and was clearly linked to the right to justice. Other speakers welcomed the actions of the Working Group on enforced disappearances which was the first thematic procedure set up in the field of human rights and during the 30 years in existence the Working Group had clarified 10,000 cases, however, another 40,000 cases remained to be clarified. It was important to ensure that the Working Group on enforced disappearances had the necessary resources and, taking in account its heavy workload; the Working Group needed greater resources than other Special Procedures and this had to be kept in mind. Enforced or involuntary disappearances were serious violations of international law and could be considered as crimes against humanity. The resolution of these issues required a global approach and should balance the right of families to know the fate of family members and to compensate victims with the need of the authorities to guarantee the non-reappearance of these crimes and the need to protect witnesses and victims of these violations.

With regards to arbitrary detention, a speaker noted that this was a subject that needed to be addressed by international law. The Working Group was basing its work on the premise that no human being could be deprived of their freedom in secret and this applied in situations of armed conflict too. Persons in detention were entitled to due process and this right was not guaranteed in secret detention. It was alarming that secret detention was still being used to combat various scourges. The Working Group was encouraged to closely follow allegations of arbitrary detention in situations of public unrest and to continue to provide protection in situations of armed conflict. Reports of the detention of journalists were of particular concern and it was important to respect the professional independence and the rights of journalists in accordance with international standards. The fact that the law of armed conflict was devoid of effective mechanisms for implementation and reparation did not mean that individuals were left with no international protection. Legal avenues provided by human rights law should continue to be available to the victims.

Concerning the human rights of internally displaced persons, speakers noted the efforts of the Special Rapporteur with regard to displacement provoked by climate change and agreed that more in-depth work in this area was needed, not only in terms of norms and standards, but also in terms of coordinated global responses. Enforced displacement in Africa, particularly in the context of armed conflict, was affecting women, and speakers agreed with the Special Rapporteur that more needed to be done to ensure their protection and to help them rebuild their lives on a more sustainable basis. On a positive note, internally displaced persons were no longer viewed as solely a national problem and there was growing understanding for the need of humanitarian action for people affected by displacement. However, the frequency of natural disasters had increased noticeably in recent decades and climate change continued to affect the lives and livelihoods of many, especially in developing countries. Speakers agreed with the Special Rapporteur’s insistence on the need to address environmental drivers of displacement, such as climate-induced natural disasters.

In the interactive discussion, the following countries also spoke: the African Union, Azerbaijan, Paraguay on behalf of the Southern Common Market MERCOSUR, Argentina, Japan, Cuba, Thailand, Zambia, Georgia, Chile, Nepal Norway, the United States, Spain, Nigeria speaking on behalf of the African Group, Brazil, European Union, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Algeria, Iran, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Uruguay, Sri Lanka, Djibouti, Iraq, China, Angola, Austria, the Russian Federation, Morocco, France, Australia, Turkey, Switzerland, Colombia, Pakistan, Congo and Peru.

Speaking in right of reply were the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Georgia, the Russian Federation, Azerbaijan, Japan and Armenia.

Speaking in second rights of reply were Georgia, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Azerbaijan, Japan and Armenia.

The next meeting of the Council will be at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, 8 March when it will hold all day meetings to conclude the interactive dialogue on enforced and involuntary disappearances, arbitrary detention and internally displaced persons and then start interactive dialogues with the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing, the Special Representative for the Secretary-General on violence against children and the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children.


Documentation

The Report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, (A/HRC/16/48), reflects communications and cases examined by the Working Group during its three sessions in 2010, covering the period 14 November 2009 to 12 November 2010.

Mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina (14 to 21 June 2010), (A/HRC/16/48/Add.1), outlines the mission of the Working Group to Bosnia and Herzegovina, the purpose of which was to learn about the efforts made by the State party to address cases of enforced disappearances/missing persons, and examine lessons learned and good practices.

Follow-up to Country Recommendations, (A/HRC/16/48/Add.2), is available in Spanish only.

Best Practices on Enforced Disappearances in Domestic Criminal Legislation, (A/HRC/16/48/Add.3), draws on existing legislation and jurisprudence to highlight best practices to assist States in enhancing existing, and developing new legislation on enforced disappearance. The conclusions contain a list of such best practices to be followed by all States.

Corrigendum, (A/HRC/16/48/Add.3/Corr.1), Pages 2 and 10, the title of chapter V should read “Participation in the commission of enforced disappearance”.

Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, (A/HRC/16/47), includes thematic issues to which the Working Group has devoted its attention in 2010, namely the application of international human rights law to situations of armed conflict and the impact this has on the mandate of the Working Group. The issue of secret detention in the context of countering terrorism is also addressed.

Corrigendum, (A/HRC/16/47/Corr.1), Summary, third paragraph, and paragraph 15, first sentence For 844 individuals read 2,826 individuals.

Opinions Adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, (A/HRC/16/47/Add.1), contains the opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its fifty-sixth, fifty-seventh and fifty-ninth sessions, held in November 2009, May 2010 and August 2010, respectively.

Mission to Malaysia (7 to 17 June 2010), (A/HRC/16/47/Add.2), notes the relatively long periods accused persons spend in pretrial detention, sometimes for several years. Police agents often fail to inform detainees about their rights to contact family members and to consult a lawyer of their choice. Limited pretrial discovery prevents defendants from defending themselves and prosecution evidence is not consistently made available. The law imposes excessive restrictions on appeals and the habeas corpus resource is rarely used, and solely for procedural issues.

Mission to Armenia (6 to 15 September 2010), (A/HRC/16/47/Add.3), describes the institutional and legislative framework with respect to deprivation of liberty and human rights in Armenia, since its independence in 1991. It refers to important legislative reforms made in recent years that are conducive to creating better standards of human rights for persons who are deprived of their liberty. It also provides a brief outline of the criminal justice system to elaborate on the context in which deprivation of liberty exists.

The Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of internally displaced persons, Chaloka Beyani, (A/HRC/16/43), details the specific activities of the mandate and the Representative of the Secretary-General on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Walter Kälin, during the reporting period, until the end of his tenure on 31 October 2010. It also presents the methods of work, as well as the thematic and priority areas of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Chaloka Beyani, who assumed his mandate on 1 November 2010.

Mission to Iraq (26 September to 3 October 2010), (A/HRC/16/43/Add.1), details efforts undertaken by the government of Iraq and the international community so far to address the problem of internal displacement. The scale and complexity of the internal displacement situation in Iraq, however, require that these efforts be strengthened.

The Follow-up to the visit to Azerbaijan in 2007 (19 to 24 May 2010), (A/HRC/16/43/Add.2), notes important progress since the Representative’s last mission, such as the closing of tented camps, but emphasizes that the protracted nature of the displacement, which has persisted for nearly two decades, continues to affect the human rights of close to 600,000 internally displaced persons in that country.

The Follow-up to the visit to Georgia (13 to 16 September 2010), (A/HRC/16/43/Add.3), assesses to what extent the recommendations the Representative made pursuant to his previous missions have been implemented and what remains to be done. In particular, it looks at the progress made in the implementation of the Action Plan for the Implementation of the State Strategy on Internally Displaced Persons and to identify the remaining challenges in the search for durable solutions for more than 350,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs). In addition, the Representative wanted to assess the situation in the Gali district in Abkhazia, Georgia and the return and reintegration prospects of those displaced from that region.

The Follow-up to the visit to the Central African Republic (9 to 17 July 2010), (A/HRC/16/43/Add.4), notes that the situation concerning internal displacement remains extremely worrying, with still nearly 200,000 internally displaced persons in the country. While recognizing the progress made in the peace process, which has allowed several tens of thousands of displaced persons to return to their homes, the Representative is nevertheless alarmed by the large new waves of displacements.

Operational guidelines on the protection of persons in situations of natural disasters, (A/HRC/16/43/Add.5), details the guidelines that were developed in response to a need for more practical guidance on the application and protection of the human rights of persons affected by situations of natural disaster. The Operational Guidelines aim primarily to support international and non-government humanitarian organizations in their efforts to ensure that disaster relief and recovery efforts are conducted within a framework that protects and furthers the human rights of affected persons. This includes ensuring that human rights principles are integrated into disaster response from the earliest stages, and that measures are taken to facilitate the consultation and participation of affected persons and communities in relevant processes and decisions. They may also be useful for governmental actors, in particular disaster management institutions, which are primarily responsible for providing protection and humanitarian assistance to affected persons.

Presentation of Reports

JEREMY SARKIN, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, said that in 2010 the Working Group had commemorated its thirtieth anniversary. This was done with an inaugural side event at the thirteenth session of the Human Rights Council on 18 March 2010 and with a commemorative event held on 5 November 2010, as mandated by this Council’s resolution 14/10. The event was organized with the support of the Working Group as the first thematic human rights mechanism with a global reach and further stimulated reflection on contemporary and future challenges for its work. The Working Group encouraged Member States to further engage with the Working Group and civil society to report cases of enforced or involuntary disappearances and thus progressively overcome underreporting. The event was attended by a number of relatives of disappeared persons.

Since its creation, the Working Group had transmitted 53,337 individual cases to Governments in all regions of the world. Over the past five years, the Working Group had clarified 1,814 cases. Much work therefore remained to be done. Enforced disappearances remained a global problem occurring worldwide and, in particular, in States suffering from internal conflict. Thousands of cases of disappearances remained unclarified and consequently, they remained continuous crimes. The Working Group drew attention to the underreporting of disappearance cases in all regions of the world including Africa. The phenomenon occurred for various reasons, including poverty, illiteracy, fear of reprisals, weak administration of justice, ineffective reporting channels, institutionalized systems of impunity, a practice of silence, restrictions on the work of civil society and unfortunately a lack of awareness about the Working Group and its mandate.

In its annual report the Working Group noted four major areas of concern. The first referred to the continuous and autonomous nature of the crime of enforced disappearances. In the general comment that it had adopted during the reporting period, the Working Group recognized that “one consequence of the continuing character of enforced disappearance was that it was possible to convict someone for enforced disappearance on the basis of a legal instrument that was enacted after the enforced disappearance had begun, notwithstanding the fundamental principle of non-retroactivity. The second concern related to the right to the truth, which had been acknowledged by the Working Group as an autonomous right since its first report in 1981. The right to truth was both an individual and a collective right. The third concern related to widespread impunity for the crime of enforced disappearance which, in certain parts of the world, remained a particularly acute problem. The Working Group noted that the introduction of enforced disappearances as a continuous and autonomous crime, coupled with the right of victims to know the truth, would lead to a decrease in impunity. The fourth concern related to a pattern of threats, intimidations and reprisals which existed against victims of enforced disappearances including family members, witnesses and human rights defenders working on such cases. The Working Group called upon States to take specific measures to prevent such psychological and medical support, and to punish the perpetrators and protect those working on enforced disappearances. The Working Group encouraged States to apply the most comprehensive definition of “victims”, with no distinction between direct and indirect victims.

MALICK EL-HADJI SOW, Chairperson of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, said that the Working Group had in 2010 held its fifty-seventh through fifty-ninth sessions and carried out missions to Malaysia and Armenia. The Working Group had also participated in the study on secret detention within the framework of combating terrorism and its mandate had been renewed for another three years. The Working Group had paid particular attention to arbitrary detention in connection with armed conflict and in this regard the International Criminal Court had confirmed the applicability of international human rights law and international humanitarian law in situations of armed conflicts. The Geneva Conventions and their Optional Protocols sought to achieve the same objectives and international human rights law, namely protection of human rights, and it was imperative for all governments to respect the international norms not only in times of peace but also in times of armed conflict. The Working Group believed that no State should deprive a human being from their freedom in secret. Secret detention was a form of enforced disappearance and if applied systematically could constitute a crime against humanity. The Working Group had sent 102 urgent appeals to a number of governments concerning almost 3,000 persons and welcomed the freeing of three individuals, in Ethiopia, Viet Nam and Myanmar. A number of cases submitted by the Working Group concerned children.

Mr. Sow then spoke of the case of Venezuelan judge Maria Lourdes Afiuni, who had been in arbitrary detention since December 2009 and called on the Government of Venezuela to immediately free Mrs. Afiuni. Turning to the visit to Malaysia, the Chairperson said that the challenges involved a rather long period of provisory detention, in which detainees were prevented from obtaining adequate legal assistance. Immigration detention did not conform to international law and there was excessive authority given to paramilitary forces in charge of arresting irregular migrants in Malaysia. The Working Group called on the Government of Malaysia to modify laws concerning detention of asylum seekers, refugees and irregular migrants. Concerning the country visit to Armenia, the Working Group noted the encouraging efforts by the Government in the implementation of legislative reforms, particularly those of the Penal Code and its alignment with international norms and standards. Release on bail was almost never used in Armenia and prison overcrowding was a natural consequence. The Working Group observed the lack of courts and procedures for minors. The Government should ensure that appropriate procedures were established for migrants detained at border crossings by the border police. The Working Group had also addressed in 2010 the revision of its working methods and urged the Human Rights Council to extend its mandate to include examining of detention conditions. Concerning the crises currently underway in which arbitrary detention was being used as a tool, the Working Group said it was following situations closely and called on States to use dialogue to resolve conflicts.

CHALOKA BEYANI, Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons, said that in this first report to the Council, he had tried to maintain and consolidate the gains and good practices which had come to characterize the mandate and would continue the constructive engagement with Member States through country visits, capacity building activities and participation in the Inter-Agency Standing Committee – a core component of the Special Rapporteur’s mainstreaming activities. Since the mandate’s creation in 1992 there had been important progress in advancing and gaining broad acceptance for the normative framework to protect and implement the rights of internally displaced persons, including the new tool to complement the existing normative framework on internal displacement, namely the revised Operational Guidelines on the Protection of Person in Situations of Natural Disasters, provided as an addendum to the current report.

It was estimated that 50 million persons were displaced by natural disasters in any given year and that many millions would be forcibly displaced due to the effects of climate change in the coming decades. The recognition of climate change-induced displacement in the Cancun agreement represented an important step forward and a constructive platform from which to develop normative standards and strengthen collaborative efforts. A further objective of the Special Rapporteur’s mandate was to support the follow up processes related to the ratification and implementation of the African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons 2009, also known as the Kampala Convention which represented a major achievement by African Union Member States to protect and assist internally displaced persons and would require a minimum of 15 Member States for ratification. The issue of women and internal displacement required focused attention to mainstream their rights in the United Nations system. Regarding the response to internally displaced persons living outside camps and settlements, the Special Rapporteur said the response to these situations remained largely ad hoc and that it would be important to look into good practices which already existed among a number of organizations.

On the Special Rapporteur’s visit to Iraq, where an estimated 1.55 million persons remained in displacement since 2006, though the Government had taken encouraging steps, including the adoption in 2008 of a national policy on displacement, further action should be taken such as a two-pronged approach to address the need for durable solutions along with the immediate needs and human rights of displacement affected communities. The visit to the Central African Republic revealed a worrying situation with regard to internal displacement as an estimated 192,000 persons were still internally displaced in the country and the Special Rapporteur called on the Government, together with the international community, to protect the civilian population, including by reinforcing the presence of security forces in the region. The follow-up visit to Georgia found that the Government had made progress but that further efforts were needed to address the various challenges still faced by more than 350,000 internally displaced persons, in particular to ensure that evictions related to the closing of collective centers were carried out in accordance with international standards. The visit to Azerbaijan found significant efforts and investments were deployed by the Government but continued efforts were needed such as the development of alternative housing strategies to avoid the increased threat of evictions. The follow-up visit to Armenia revealed that many internally displaced persons had integrated well into their host communities but that efforts regarding return programmes should also focus on economic and social conditions. The visit to Haiti revealed an estimated 1.3 million persons that still lived in informal camps or settlements in and around Port au Prince in sub standard conditions and the Special Rapporteur urged the Government to give immediate priority to developing a durable solutions strategy. In Yemen, the visit revealed that the internal displacement situation continued to warrant humanitarian assistance and that this assistance was jeopardized by a lack of funding.

Statements by Concerned Countries

LJUBICA PERIC (Bosnia and Herzegovina), speaking as concerned country, expressed its satisfaction with the fact that the working Group held its ninety-fifth regular session in Bosnia and Herzegovina right after the official visit to the country. In this context, they wished to stress the importance Bosnia and Herzegovina gave to the fight for truth and justice in the frame of human rights violations including disappearances. Bosnia and Herzegovina in recent history had passed through the period when violations of human rights had occurred in a large scale. Therefore, the concerned country welcomed the Working Group’s visit hoping that this visit and recommendations made by Working Group would shed some light on this sensitive issue in their country. Beside the killed and displaced persons, there were tens of thousands who had disappeared. Bosnia and Herzegovina and its institutions had been dealing with this issue and making efforts to resolve as many cases as possible. In that context the Institute for Missing Persons, an independent institution consisting of representatives from all peoples, was established.

Today 15 years after the war, large numbers of cases had been resolved, but the process of search was still going on. Bosnia and Herzegovina had recognized the important role of different international organizations which were of great help to the country’s struggle. Their assistance was precious and Bosnia and Herzegovina hoped that they would continue with that assistance so that they could successfully complete this process.

SATENIK ABGARIAN (Armenia), speaking as a concerned country, said regarding the visit of the Working Group on arbitrary detention, Armenia had considered the report and recommendations with close attention. Concerning the independence of the judiciary and judges, Armenia said that their independence was one of the priorities of the current judicial reform, which aimed at strengthening the system and creating appropriate institutions free of corruption. Some of the measures included increase of judges’ salaries, criminal penalties for attempts to interfere in the judicial process, training for judges and others. Concerning the question of irregular migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, Armenia said that the new law was being drafted with the aim of strengthening the system for dealing with those groups. The presence on the border of Armenian migration services was planned, in order to assist with the identification of migrants and asylum seekers. In conclusion, Armenia thanked the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and ensured them of its continuing cooperation.

RADZIAL ALWI MOHAMED (Malaysia), speaking as a concerned country, said Malaysia extended its appreciation to the Working Group for its visit to Malaysia and that the meetings and discussions with various ministries, agencies, civil societies and other stakeholders as well as prisons and detention had provided the Working Group with the opportunity to observe the efforts made by the Government. Concerning the implementation of the work of the Working Group on Criminal Detention, the delegation said that preventive laws were promulgated to safeguard the public interest and it was imperative that this should be done without jeopardizing and compromising on peace, stability and security of the nation. The Government had allocated $ 32.5 million to upgrade and enhance facilities throughout the country, reduce the number of detainees to within the overall capacity of facilities, and pursue international cooperation with other countries and international organizations on the management and administration of detention centers. Regarding the lack of legal aid systems, the Government had launched a national legal aid foundation to assist those unable to afford a lawyer to obtain legal representation.

RIADH YALDA OSHANA (Iraq), speaking as a concerned country, thanked the Special Rapporteur on internally displaced persons for his report. However, the delegation made a few clarifications regarding the visit of the Special Rapporteur, who received full support from the Iraqi Government and local non-governmental organizations. The greatest remaining challenge for Iraq was how to reach out to over two million persons who had been displaced because of the conflict. Special services were being offered to those who were internally displaced and efforts were being made to establish reconciliation in areas where sectarian violence had erupted.

Concerning paragraph 56 of the report, Iraq reiterated that it had taken all possible measures to protect national civilians, including Christian communities. Finally, the delegation pointed out that the return of internally displaced persons had to happen voluntarily and, in some cases, those who had been internally displaced had settled in new areas and built new relationships thereby affecting their desire to return.

Interactive Dialogue

KHADIJA R. MASRI (African Union) said that regional cooperation was particularly important in protecting the rights of internally displaced persons. The first and foremost instrument in the protection of internally displaced persons in Africa was the Convention of the African Union of Kampala adopted in 2009. The Commission of the African Union also noted the efforts of the Special Rapporteur with regard to displacement provoked by climate change and agreed that more in-depth work in this area was needed, not only in terms of norms and standards, but also in terms of coordinated global responses. Enforced displacement in Africa, particularly in the context of armed conflict, was affecting women, and the African Union agreed with the Special Rapporteur that more needed to be done to ensure their protection and to help them rebuild their lives on a more sustainable basis.

RASHAD SHIRINOV (Azerbaijan) said the annual report showed that the visits of the Special Rapporteur had contributed to the adoption of relevant policies and measures in favour of internally displaced persons and hoped these visits would be followed up by the new mandate holder given the magnitude and scope of the problems with internally displaced persons all over the world. The process of exchange and advancement of the knowledge and good practices in relation to internal displacement, which in its turn would lead to embarking on practical changes, was a result of fruitful discussions amongst the pertinent humanitarian actors. The Government had welcomed the inclusion of climate change and natural disasters in the priorities of the Special Rapporteur. The majority of internally displaced persons were displaced since the Armenia-Azerbaijan Nagorno-Karabakh conflict which ended with the 1994 cease fire and the Government would continue its active and vigorous efforts to improve the living conditions of its citizens and commended the Special Rapporteur’s call on the international community to intensify its efforts to achieve a peaceful solution to the Armenia-Azerbaijan Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and to implement relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions demanding the withdraw of all occupying forces

RAUL MARTINEZ (Paraguay), speaking on behalf of the Southern Commonwealth MERCOSUR, said that it was grateful for the presentation of the report from the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances. The right to truth was extremely important and was critical to the victims of enforced disappearances and their families. The right to truth was an autonomous right and was clearly linked to the right to justice. MERCOSUR supported the exchange of best practices and, in this regard, highlighted the importance of the Latin American initiative to identify the remains of disappeared persons, which involved top forensic scientists from the region. As noted in the report, the MERCOSUR countries had made significant contributions to the research of the Working Group and would continue to support them in their highly important mandate.

SEBASTIAN ROSALES (Argentina) said that the humanitarian work of the Working Group on arbitrary detention demonstrated the importance of this issue in all regions of the world and the need to continue with the efforts on prevention and sanction of this phenomenon. Following the restoration of democracy in Argentina in 1993, the Government had reaffirmed the commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights on national and international levels. In this context, the priority was accorded to combating impunity and the promotion of recognition of the crime of forced disappearances. Argentina welcomed the general comments on the right to truth and said that they might be linked to relevant recent developments, such as the progress made in protection of witnesses. Argentina believed that all those initiatives needed to be unified in one single instrument. Argentina was among the first countries to ratify the Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances and urged all States to sign up to this important international instrument for the protection of human rights.

YUJI YAMAMOTO (Japan) said that regardless of the Working Group’s dedication for more than 30 years, incidents of enforced disappearances continue to occur. Innocent children and young girls were among the victims of enforced disappearances and Japan could not imagine their suffering or that of their families. The Government of Japan would like to request the Working Group to continue to encourage the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to take positive and concrete action with respect to the 12 victims of abduction in order to confirm their whereabouts. Japan welcomed the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance which was essential in affirming as an international community that cases of enforced disappearances should be punished as criminal offences, as well as from the perspective of deterring the occurrence of similar crimes in the future.

JUAN QUINTANILLA (Cuba) said that Cuba remained deeply concerned about the arbitrary detention of five Cuban militants by the United States. The detainees had been submitted to an impartial, politically-motivated trial in Miami and they had not been given access to 80 percent of the case documentation prior to the trial. These five political prisoners had been illegally and arbitrarily detained and it was deeply regrettable that the United States Government had decided not to reopen the case. The Cuban delegation asked for the immediate release of these five detainees and asked the Chairperson of the Working Group on arbitrary detention to consider and comment on this situation. In closing, the Cuban delegation reminded the Council that those responsible for enforced or involuntary disappearances should not benefit from international immunity and should be held responsible for their actions.

SUWANA SUWANJUTA (Thailand) said Thailand attached great importance to engagement and cooperation with the Working Group on arbitrary detention and had tried its best to expedite investigations and regularly provided updated information. Thailand welcomed the entry into force of the Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances in December last year and was pleased to inform the Working Group that Thailand’s Ministry of Justice would soon propose that Thailand become a signatory to the Convention. Thailand took good note of the concerns raised in the report over the lack of resources for the Working Group and hoped that the outcome of the Council’s Review would help to ensure adequate and equitable funding for all mandate-holders of the Special Procedures. The Thai Government did not condone enforced or involuntary disappearances and took all allegations of enforced or involuntary disappearances seriously.

WINNIE SITHOLE MWENDA (Zambia) said that Zambia held the view that all Member States of the United Nations had an obligation to cooperate with the Special Procedure mandate holders, whether they be thematic or country specific, and to comply with the findings of these important bodies. Special Procedure mandate holders were established to serve an important purpose and State cooperation was essential. Zambia expressed concern at the report of the Working Group which indicated that some States did not respond to the issues on arbitrary detention and urged all States to fulfil their international human rights obligations by cooperating with the Working Group. The majority of the States that received urgent appeals did not respond and of the 844 individuals that were the subject of the 102 urgent appeals, only 23 were released. Due to the financial constraints that the Working Group faced in discharging its mandate, Zambia urged the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to consider increasing resources for the Working Group. Zambia intended to support the Working Group’s proposal to consider communications concerning alleged arbitrary detention by government authorities in situations of armed conflict.

ZURAB TCHIABERASHVILI (Georgia) said that due to several phases of full scale ethnic cleansing and the foreign occupation of the Georgian regions of Abkhazia, Tskhinvali and South Ossetia, approximately 400,000 persons were forced to leave their homes and had thus turned into long-term internally displaced persons and refugees. Though Georgia had made significant progress in improving the living conditions of internally displaced persons, their return to their permanent places of residence remained the primary objective of the Georgian Government.

JUAN PEDRO SEPULVEDA CASTRO (Chile) said that concerning the chapter on secret detention in the report of the Working Group on arbitrary detention, this was a subject that needed to be addressed by international law. The Working Group was basing its work on the premise that no human being could be deprived of their freedom in secret. This applied in situations of armed conflict too. Persons in detention were entitled to due process and this right was not guaranteed in secret detention. It was alarming that secret detention was still being used to combat various scourges. Chile congratulated the Working Group on the extension of its mandate and on its twentieth anniversary that would be celebrated this year.

BHRIGU DHUNGANA (Nepal) said that Nepal remained engaged in dealing with the remnants of the over a decade long armed conflict through institutional and democratic means. Two bills were submitted to the Legislature-Parliament for the establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and a Disappearance Commission which were prepared with the widest possible stakeholders including the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The bill on disappearance criminalized disappearance and formed an independent and impartial commission to investigate and penalize the perpetrators and provided reparation and justice to the victims and their families. Nepal noted that it fully respected the human rights of detainees as well as their right not to be arbitrarily deprived of liberty. Nepal called for wider cooperation from the United Nations and international community with countries in need to address issues of internally displaced persons and to work for durable solutions. A series of programmes was adopted by the Government to ensure the right to housing which included a housing programme targeted to the rehabilitation of displaced families.

BEATE STIRO (Norway) said that much progress had been made since the creation in 1992 of the mandate on internal displacement. In this respect, internally displaced persons were no longer viewed as solely a national problem and there was growing understanding for the need of humanitarian action for people affected by displacement. The frequency of natural disasters had increased noticeably in recent decades and climate change continued to affect the lives and livelihoods of many, especially in developing countries. Norway agreed with the Special Rapporteur’s report and in particular with his insistence on the need to address environmental drivers of displacement, such as climate-induced natural disasters. In closing, Norway reiterated its commitment to this mandate and reminded Members of the Council that in June 2011 it would host the Nansen Conference on Climate Change and Displacement in the Twenty-first Century.

OSMAN TAT (United States) said the United States welcomed Dr. Chaloka Beyani’s attention to the important issue of internally displaced persons and commended his predecessor, Dr. Walter Kalin, for his services and dedication in fulfilling his mandate. The United States agreed that protecting internally displaced persons remained one of the greatest humanitarian challenges facing the international community today. They appreciated Dr. Kalin’s invaluable work to promote the protection of internally displaced persons and elevate the issue in international discourse. The United States was particularly impressed by Dr. Kalin’s efforts to follow up on his previous work through continued country engagement, including in Haiti where some 800,000 were living in informal camps or settlements in the wake of the January 2010 earthquake.

The United States would continue to advocate for improved humanitarian access where it was restricted by violence against humanitarian workers or bureaucratic obstacles. The United States was pleased to see that Dr. Beyani had prioritized several important issues, including improved protection of the human rights of internally displaced persons who were particularly vulnerable. They shared the concern, however, that the international community needed more capacity to protect persons affected by disasters, including internally displaced persons. Therefore, the United States urged all relevant actors to continue developing their capacity to monitor and advocate for the human rights of all disaster-and conflict-affected populations. In conclusion, the United States said that it was imperative for all States to ensure that all who were in contact with mandate holders remained free from reprisals.

PABLO GOMEZ DE OLEA BUSTINZA (Spain) said that Spain supported the Working Group’s interpretation of dealing with arbitrary detention in situations of armed conflict and agreed that it did not release States of their obligations under international law. As a country that had constant cooperation with Special Procedures, Spain believed in the importance of country visits and follow-up visits. Also, Spain shared the concerns of the Working Group about possible reprisals against persons who expended the cooperation to the Working Group during country visits. Spain said that it had already accepted the competence of the Committee on enforced disappearances and added that the report of the Working Group needed to be accordingly amended. In conclusion, Spain reminded the Council that Spain had supported the Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances from the start.

OSITADINMA ANAEDU (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the African Group, thanked the Working Group on arbitrary detention for its detailed report. The African Group also noted the recommendation of the Working Group that its mandate be expanded to include the examination of conditions of detention around the world as well as the monitoring of State compliance with obligations concerning all human rights of detained and imprisoned persons. However, the African Group was not convinced of the necessity of this course of action at this stage. Regarding the Working Group on enforced and involuntary disappearances, the delegation said that it was imperative for the Working Group to ensure that information provided to concerned countries was credible, accurate and verifiable. This would allow for greater and more constructive interaction between States and the Working Group in question.

OTAVIO DRUMONT CANCADO TRINDADE (Brazil) said Brazil encouraged the Working Group on arbitrary detention to closely follow allegations of arbitrary detention in situations of public unrest. Reports of the detention of journalists were of particular concern. Brazil highlighted the importance to respect the professional independence and the rights of journalists in accordance with international standards. Brazil was of the view that the Working Group should continue to consider communications on situations of deprivation of liberty if they continued to apply and were complementary to specific provisions of international humanitarian law. The fact that the law of armed conflict was devoted of effective mechanisms for implementation and reparation did not mean that individuals were left with no international protection. Legal avenues provided by human rights law should continue to be available to the victims. Brazil encouraged the Working Group to continue to provide protection in situations of armed conflict.

On internally displaced persons, Brazil welcomed the new Special Rapporteur Chaloka Beyani, and congratulated him on the report. Brazil appreciated his focus on capacity building activities, which Mr. Beyani considered as the cornerstone of his mandate. Technical assistance increased the impact of the Rapporteur’s work on the ground and enhanced the protection provided to populations. This mandate had given many concrete examples in that regard, such as the support to national policies and strategies on internal displacement, the holding of workshops on durable solutions for internally displaced persons and the training of Government officials and United Nations and non-governmental organizations staff.

JOELLE HIVONNET (European Union) said on the question of arbitrary detention, the European Union fully agreed that the standards of international human rights law must be respected by States, including in situations of armed conflict. The European Union welcomed last year the study on practices in combating secret detention in the context of counter-terrorism and encouraged States to implement the recommendations from the study in order to put an end to those practices. The European Council urged States to investigate reprisals against individuals cooperating with the Working Group, bring perpetrators to justice and provide redress for victims and the European Union wished to hear more from the Working Group on cases of reprisals against individuals and the measures taken to address them. Also, what were the main changes that occurred in the working practices of the Working Group on arbitrary detention? Turning to the Working Group on forced disappearances, the European Union regretted the fact that the Working Group still had not received replies on the 514 cases, nor had it received an invitation for a country visit to Iran, that had been requested six years ago. Within the framework of recent events, the European Union reiterated the call of the Working Group to the Government of Belarus to undertake a full and impartial investigation and to sign and ratify the Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances. The Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances had come into effect last December and the European Union asked the Working Group what impact it would have on the work of the Group.

GULNARA ISKAKOVA (Kyrgyzstan) said that in 2010 the Kyrgyz Republic faced serious tests of national unity and the strength of statehood. After the revolution in April, a variety of forces, seeking to take advantage of the situation of destabilisation, had inflamed inter-ethnic clashes in the South. The numbers of military and police were insufficient and the international community could not help. To end the conflict, the Interim Government had to introduce a state of emergency in the South and immediately began to implement humanitarian programmes.

In order to analyse the sources and causes of the conflict and to prevent such events from reoccurring in the future, the Government of Kyrgyzstan had undertaken a number of important steps, including the establishment of a National Commission to study the causes of these tragic events. The Commission’s report, which was submitted in December 2010, was currently under consideration by the Kyrgyz Government. In conclusion, the Kyrgyz delegation reiterated its commitment and readiness to cooperate with all UN mechanisms.

VAHEH GEVORGYAN (Armenia) said Armenia acknowledged the contribution of Dr. Walter Kaelin in formulating and conducting the policy of the Armenian Government aimed at the accommodation and rehabilitation of the remaining 1,800 internally displaced persons families. Dr. Kaelin’s recommendations which came as a result of his last visit to Armenia in September 2010 had been closely assessed and some of them were already reflected in the agenda of the Government. Consequently, a pilot programme was being finalized with the United Nations agencies in Armenia. The programme should update the mapping of internally displaced persons in Taush region and provide important guidance to the implementation of the Government programme on internally displaced persons adopted in 2008.

Armenia took note of the views of Dr. Kaelin on integrating the rights of internally displaced persons in the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and they certainly agreed that the human rights approach should be fully integrated in the peace building. Apparently, these views were based on the theoretical contribution of this mandate such as the Guide for Mediators and the Framework on Durable Solutions for Internally Displaced Persons. However, they had also noticed that when it came to practice the mandate had been so far unable to follow its own recommendations particularly in two key areas such as distinguishing all categories of internally displaced persons and refugees; and guaranteeing cooperation by all parties for durable solutions.

MOHAMMED SALIM SAMAR (Algeria) said that Algeria wished to pay tribute to the Working Group on enforced disappearances that had helped shed light on thousands of cases throughout the world. The Working Group legitimately raised the question of its lack of resources, which was a problem of a number of Special Procedures. That was why Algeria noted during the Review of the Council the need for a rationalisation on terms of references for Special Procedures. Algeria invited the Working Group on arbitrary detention to go further at the point on establishing the supremacy of international human rights law and international humanitarian law in situations of armed conflict. Algeria was grateful to the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons for the quality of his first report, but the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement could only be considered after the approval of States. In conclusion, Algeria asked for comments of the Special Rapporteur on why the Kampala Convention had been ratified by only three countries since it had been opened for signature in October 2009.

HAMID AHMADI (Iran) said that the primary task of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances was to determine the fate or whereabouts of persons who were reportedly disappeared. The delegation raised the issue of the illegal abduction of four Iranian diplomats by armed mercenaries in September of 1982. There was evidence to show that these diplomats were still alive and kept somewhere in Occupied Palestine by forces of the occupying regime. Iran formally requested the Working Group to consider and follow seriously the case of these disappeared Iranian diplomats.

With regard to the case of three American citizens, these individuals were arrested after illegally crossing Iranian borders from Iraq. They had been charged with illegal entrance into Iran and this was therefore not a case of arbitrary detention. Finally, Iran confirmed that their trial had started in February and that the perpetrators would be treated according to national law.

ASIM VETIKHAR AHMAD (Pakistan), speaking , on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, thanked the Working Group on arbitrary detention for their report. The Working Group had made a number of important recommendations in its report. The first recommendation was a proposal to expand the mandate of the Working Group to include the examination of conditions of detention. The Organization of the Islamic Conference believed that the Working Group was doing extremely important work as spelled out in its existing mandate. They believed that the extension of the mandate to include conditions of detention would increase the work load of the Group, not to mention introducing a resource constraint.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference believed that the Working Group’s argument regarding the application of international instruments on human rights in situations of armed conflict needed to be studied and debated further in order to examine all its implications. The Organization of the Islamic Conference thanked the Working Group on enforced and involuntary disappearances for its annual report. They agreed that the problem of enforcing and involuntary disappearances was an important one and States should take all necessary steps to address the issue.

LAURA DUPUY LASSERRE (Uruguay) said that for Uruguay the support of the Working Group on forced disappearances was a real commitment, since between 1973 and 1984 Uruguay itself had been a victim of this scourge which had devastated the country. Uruguay welcomed the statement that enforced disappearances constituted a crime to which statute of limitations could not apply. The cases reported to the United Nations were less important than the others, which were under-reported for a series of reasons, including poverty, fear, disempowerment and others. Uruguay welcomed the entry into force of the Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances and urged other countries to ratify this instrument in order to eradicate this aberrant practice.

Mr. U.L.M. JAUHAR (Sri Lanka) said that the Sri Lanka Institute of Information Technology had been maintaining a database of missing persons. This database would soon be placed in the custody of the newly established national Human Rights Commission. The Government took serious note of the need to reconcile the cases of disappearances. Concerning the situation of internally displaced persons, the conclusion of the terrorist conflict in Sri Lanka had brought forth the challenge of caring for and resettling approximately 300,000 internally displaced persons. At present, there were only 12,000 internally displaced persons remaining in three welfare villages in Vavuniya and Jaffna and they would be resettled in their homes on completion of the de-mining operations in the region. Indisputably, however, there remained challenges in this resettlement process, which the Government would continue to address as and when they arose.

AHMED MOHAMED ABRO (Djibouti) thanked the mandate holders for their excellent presentation. Djibouti welcomed the work done by the former Secretary-General’s Special Representative on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Walter Kalin, and his success in exercising his mandate. It stressed the importance of cooperation with all stakeholders starting from governments. Djibouti noted the work done by the Special Rapporteur on internally displaced persons, Chaloka Beyani, and encouraged his cooperation, in particular with governments on the development of international instruments to protect the rights of internally displaced persons. Djibouti was among the 29 States who signed the African Union Convention for the protection and assistance of internally displaced persons in Africa. In conclusion, they wished to express their intention to ratify the Convention of Kampala shortly.

BASHAR AL-NUAIMEE (Iraq) said that Iraq had closely examined the report of the Working Group on arbitrary detention. Not all residents of the Al Ashraf camp had permits to reside in Iraq. The presence of those persons in Iraq was a political and humanitarian problem, in which many organizations and institutions were involved. It was also a social problem and the inhabitants were controlled by a small gang that was preventing them from either returning to their country or going on to third countries. Iraq then updated the Council on the recent incidents in the camp.

XU JING (China) said the Chinese delegation noted the report submitted by the mandate holders. Enforced disappearances were a human rights violation and Chinese legislation and the constitution both stipulated that all citizens should enjoy freedoms not to be limited by others and any persons subjected to this limitation could request for an administrative appeal in accordance with the State’s law. The delegation of China would like to know the basis for the Working Group’s conclusions and emphasized that Special Procedures must correctly refer to any information provided by the State. China would like to continue its contacts with the Working Group. China also noted that despite the efforts of the Special Rapporteur on internally displaced persons, the number of internally displaced persons continued to increase and vulnerable populations including women and children were in a difficult position.

MANUEL BAMBI (Angola) said that Angola attached great importance to the work that had been conducted by both Working Groups and would do its utmost to help achieve the main goals of their mandates. With regard to the report A/HRS/16/48 on enforced disappearances that referred to the three Angolan cases, the Attorney General had undertaken further investigations, which included interviewing the local authorities as well as members of the local community where the disappearances took place. Concerning the report of the Working Group on arbitrary detentions, the Angolan Government had worked hard to implement the recommendations made and had also adopted new practical measures to prevent this practice. Finally, the delegation confirmed that the number of cases of arbitrary detentions had decreased significantly and the living conditions of inmates had improved, in particular with the construction of new prison facilities.

CHRISTIAN STROHAL (Austria) welcomed Professor Chaloka Beyani, and congratulated him on his appointment as the new mandate-holder on the human rights of internally displaced persons. As the traditional main sponsor of this resolution in the Human Rights Council, Austria took this opportunity to assure the Council of their full and continued support for its activities. Austria fully concurred with Mr. Beyani’s assertion that the efforts of mainstreaming the human rights of internally displaced persons, of promoting the Guiding Principles on internal displacement and of keeping a clear focus on follow-up and capacity building activities needed to be the cornerstones of his work. They strongly agreed with Mr. Beyani on the continued need to cooperate closely with the Intern-Agency Standing Committee, the Emergency Relief Coordinator, Office of Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees for the effective exercise of his mandate. Austria asked Mr. Beyani to tell them more on how he was planning to take this essential cooperation forward.

Austria wished to assure Mr. Beyani of their full support in further developing the priorities that he had set out in his first report, namely the implementation of binding legal standards such as the African Union Convention on internal displacement, displacement in the context of natural disasters, the specific risks and problems faced by displaced women as well as by internally displaced persons outside camps.

NIKOLAI KALASHNIKOV (Russia) said that Russia thanked the experts on the Working Groups and the presentation of their reports. Russia did not support the extension of the mandate of the Working Group to include custodial detention and the human rights of detained persons. The Russian delegation welcomed the focus of the Special Rapporteur on internally displaced persons on expanding cooperation with other United Nations agencies by preventing overlap particularly regarding forced internal migration and factors regarding a particular climate. The delegation shared the concern relating to unresolved problems of internally displaced persons and emphasized that in Georgia, forced displacement of refugees was a result of the armed conflict imposed on small States by Georgia. The main conditions for resolving these categories of persons should be legal guarantees by Georgia on the promise not to use force on these small States.

OMAR HILALE (Morocco) said that Morocco would be presenting, with several other countries, a draft resolution to renew the important mandate of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances. Morocco reaffirmed the importance of country visits to the successful implementation of the mandate. Since the successful visit of the Working Group to Morocco in 2009, the Moroccan Government had responded to 22 of the 24 recommendations made by the Working Group following their visit.

The establishment of the National Council of Human Rights was evidence of the importance that Morocco placed on the promotion and protection of human rights. Beyond having legal influence, the National Council was also financially autonomous and was composed of members from diverse backgrounds, including representatives from associations, trade unions, parliamentarians and university professors.

EMMANUEL PINEDA (France) said France welcomed the actions of the Working Group on enforced disappearances which was the first thematic procedure to be set up in the field of human rights and during the 30 years of its existence the Working Group had cla4ified 10,000 cases, however, France pointed out that 40,000 other cases remained to be clarified. France said that it was important to ensure that the Working Group on enforced disapperances had the necessary resources and, taking in account its heavy workload, believed that the Working Group needed greater resources than other Special Procedures and this had to be kept in mind. France stressed the fact that Iran still had not welcomed the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances even though they had ratified the Convention. France welcomed the work of the Working Group on arbitrary detention whose mandate was renewed in 2010 for three more years. The Working Group played a very important contribution to drafting the joint study on secret detention as part of the anti-terrorism fight. France commended the Working Group for its working methods and asked how it could follow up on the numerous appeals issued each year.

SCOTT CLAREY (Australia) said forced displacement was one of the greatest human rights challenges and compromised the enjoyment of all fundamental freedoms and basic human rights. Australia welcomed the significant achievement of the normative framework founded in the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. The mandate’s work on durable solutions and operational guidelines for protecting internally displaced persons in situations of natural disaster and in integrating displacement issues into the peace processes and agreements was extremely useful including in relation to standard setting for the delivery of aid. Australia appreciated the ongoing mandate capacity building, including in partnership with the Brookings-Bern Project and the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre in Geneva. The mandate’s efforts to mainstream effective responses to forced displacement with the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the United Nations Human Rights Council was particularly important and Australia welcomed the mandate’s work with the African Union on its Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in 2009.

ELA GORKEM-GOKÇE (Turkey) welcomed the new Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Chaloka Beyani, and said that Turkey had cooperated with his predecessor who had carried out four visits to Turkey between May 2005 and December 2006. In Turkey, many projects had been undertaken within a global approach which resulted in concrete results. Approximately 47 million Euros were spent on the “Project Return to the Village and Rehabilitation”, which aimed to help families who hoped to voluntarily resettle to their previous areas of residence. The European Court of Human Rights had commended Turkey for implementing this national mechanism. The delegation noted that the report on internally displaced persons placed particular attention on situations of natural disasters. Concerning this particular issue, the Turkish delegation asked the Special Rapporteur for further information on awareness raising campaigns and other measures that could be implemented to better address this specific problem.

MAHMOUD AFIFI (Egypt) said Egypt thanked the mandate holders for their important work. The new era that had started in Egypt would be based on new mechanisms and efforts to uncover human rights violations and provide victims with effective redress and compensation. The Government of Egypt had released a number of detainees previously sent to detainee courts and the Government had adopted a new policy for prisoners which took into account new measures other than imprisonment. With regard to the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Egypt wished him the best in continuation of his work and said that internally displaced persons remained citizens of their countries and remained subject to national legislations. In addition, Egypt said that there should be respect for the sovereignty of States and for the implementation of humanitarian assistance within their territories and stressed the need of the international community to strengthen their assistance to allow States to implement their obligations and to ensure that assistance facilitated a smooth transition to development.

MICHAEL MEIER (Switzerland) said Switzerland welcomed the new Special Rapporteur on internally displaced persons and thanked him for his clear and concise statement. The report’s conclusions were relevant and urged Member States to address follow-up. Switzerland would continue to protect the human rights of internally displaced persons and welcomed the stress on strengthening standards and considered it positive that the guidelines for the protection and assistance of internally displaced persons had been implemented and would like to know what were the main challenges of the Convention and what action would be necessary for internally displaced persons to benefit from this Convention? Switzerland believed that enforced or involuntary disappearances were serious violations of international law and could be considered as crimes against humanity. The resolution of these issues required a global approach and should balance the right of families to know the fate of family members and to compensate victims with the need of the authorities to guarantee the non-reappearance of these crimes and the need to protect witnesses and victims of these violations. Last January Switzerland had signed the International Convention Against All Persons of Enforced Disappearances.

ALICIA VICTORIA ARANGO OLMOS (Colombia) said that with regard to the Working Group on arbitrary detention and the recommendations made during its visit to Colombia in 2008, many efforts had been made to deal with this particularly critical issue. In this regard, the allocated resources to deal with this issue had doubled between the period of 2002 and 2010.

Moving to the report of the Working Group on internally displaced persons, the delegation stated that the Government would devote $ 800 million to addressing this problem. As an illustration of progress, during 2010 Columbia registered a decrease of 47.8 per cent in the number of displaced households. One of Colombia’s principal priorities was its resettlement programme that had effectively helped more than 150,000 persons to return to their homes since 2009.

ASIM VETIKHAR AHMAD (Pakistan) said Pakistan attached great importance to the mandate of the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances and they remained involved to resolve all cases of disappearances. The democratic Government took the issue of disappearance very serious and with regard to the new cases of disappearances contained in the report of the Working Group, the Government of Pakistan was conducting investigations. More precise information made available would help in the investigation of these cases and the Government had taken measures to resolve the question of disappearances and many persons had been tracked down as a result. A national independent commission of inquiry on enforced disappearances had been established in Aril 2010 and in December the Commission presented a report and following that a number of persons were tried. To follow up on outstanding cases and look out to all the aspects of the matter, on 1 March 2011 Pakistan had established another commission of inquiry and this proved the commitment of the country with regard to cases of disappearances.

SEBASTIEN MUTOMB MUJING (Congo) said the Government of Congo, through its ministries and specialized persons, guaranteed to protect and help internally displaced persons and cooperated with international agencies to achieve this, particularly for vulnerable internally displaced persons including the elderly and women and children. The implementation of the recommendations was integrated into Congo’s action plan on human rights; however the performance criteria required capacity building and the ratification of the Kampala Agreement. The Government of Congo believed that the restoration of peace was of vital importance for helping internally displaced persons and had dealt with ethnic tension in the east of the county through the establishment of a local coordination framework to deal with internally displaced persons and to ensure that they would participate in upcoming elections.

CARLOS SIBILLE RIVERA (Peru) said that with regard to the report of the Working Group on enforced disappearances, Peru had established a Commission for Truth and Reconciliation to help provide remittances and justice to victims and their families. Peru also stated that the identification of best practices was particularly useful and the Government was happy to cooperate with the Working Group and share its personal experiences in the creation of this list. In addition, the question of resources remained an area of concern and, unfortunately, it prevented certain States from effectively dealing with the issue of disappearances. On the subject of arbitrary detention, Peru agreed that in cases of non-international armed conflict, international human rights and humanitarian law should still be applicable. Finally, Peru congratulated the Working Group on its twentieth anniversary.

Right of Reply

CHOE MYONG NAM. (Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea), speaking in a right of reply, rejected the unsubstantiated allegations of the Japanese delegation on the abduction case and said that this case was resolved and five survivors were returned to Japan and the situation of eight deceased persons was clearly clarified and notified to the Japanese side.
According to the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, Japan had been insisting as if this case was outstanding, as motivated by ill-minded purposes such as to avoid its legal responsibly. The only outstanding case between Japan and the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea remained the crimes committed by Japan during the colonial occupation of Korea and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea urged Japan to stop using the practice of “naming and shaming”.

ZURAB TCHIABERASHVILI (Georgia), speaking in a right of reply, said Georgia would like to remind the Russian Federation that the military control of a second country by a third country was equal to an occupation of the second country.

NIKOLAI KALASHNIKOV (Russian Federation), speaking in a right of reply, said that the Georgian authorities had committed grave human rights abuses against citizens of South Ossetia. The current presence of Russian military officials in South Ossetia had been requested by the local Government to protect them from the threat of foreign invasion and occupation. The security situation in the region continued to be of major concern to the Russian Government and the refusal of Georgia to sign a pact of non-aggression was troubling.

RASHAD SHIRINOV (Azerbaijan), speaking in a right of reply in response to a statement made by the delegation of Armenia, said that after gaining its independence in 1991, Azerbaijan remained the country with the highest number of internally displaced persons and the structure established by the Republic of Armenia had been stated at the international level in the most ambiguous manner. Azerbaijan called on the Representative of Armenia to recognize this separate identity.

YUJI YAMAMOTO (Japan), speaking in a right of reply, said at present, out of the 17 Japanese who had been abducted by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, only five had returned home and there was no explanation of what happened to the other 12. Japan would like an authorized investigation to be established by the international community to investigate what had happened to these abducted citizens. Regarding the claims on the past, Japan had expressed its feeling of deep remorse and would like to comprehensively resolve the outstanding issues of concern including the abduction issues, nuclear issues and the resolution of the issues in the past.

VAHEH GEVORGYAN (Armenia), speaking in a right of reply, said that the delegation of Azerbaijan had distorted its previous statement. This was not the only misinterpretation of Armenia’s statement and the delegation criticised Azerbaijan for losing its temper when having an open dialogue on human rights and in particular conflict zones. Armenia asked Azerbaijan to stick to the agenda of human rights when making statements to the Council.

ZURAB TCHIABERASHVILI (Georgia), speaking in a second right of reply, said that what he heard from the Russian Federation had nothing to do with reality and there was an important point which deserved clarification on the situation in the Georgian territory. Georgia urged the Russian Federation to make a similar declaration with regard to Georgia.

CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea), speaking in a second right of reply, said the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea rejected the Japanese delegation’s comments. International law provided for non-statutory limitations for human rights violations. The delegation urged the Japanese authorities to address their past and present crimes.

RASHAD SHIRINOV (Azerbaijan), speaking in a second right of reply, said that due to the occupation of nearly 20 per cent of its territory by Armenia, Azerbaijan was not in a position to protect the human rights of all its citizens. The armed aggression committed by Armenia had been described in detail by a number of international instruments and organizations. Azerbaijan called on the Government of Armenia to allow all displaced persons to return to their homes.

YUJI YAMAMOTO (Japan), speaking in a second of right of reply in response to the delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, said that it was regrettable that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea did not respond to the concerns of the international community and expected the Democratic People’s of Republic of Korea to respond in a constructive manner.

VAHEH GEVORGYAN (Armenia), speaking in a second right of reply, said there was a misinterpretation of the Security Council resolution by the Azerbaijan delegation and that there was not a single word in the resolution that could be interpreted as an occupation by Armenia of Nagorno Karabakh.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC11/020E