HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS DIALOGUE WITH SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON TOXIC WASTE AND WORKING GROUPS ON ARBITRARY DETENTION AND MERCENARIES

The Human Rights Council this morning began interactive discussions with the Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous wastes on the enjoyment of human rights, the Chairperson of the Working Group on arbitrary detention and with the Chairperson of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination. It also concluded its discussion with the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, which it began on Friday afternoon.

Before taking up the reports of the Special Procedures, the Council heard an address by the Minister of Justice of Timor-Leste, Lucia Maria Brandão. At the onset of her address, the Minister conveyed the message of President Jose-Ramos Horta whose health was improving every day. As he came out of his coma his message was of peace and a call for no revenge. Timor-Leste was extremely challenged with its capacity building required to stimulate the economy and to strengthen the Government. Thus measures to combat poverty had to enhance education, social development and strengthen law and order and democracy. Among its successes was the establishment of the National Human Rights Action Plan of Timor-Leste, which involved widespread public engagement and identified six priority areas, the Minister said. Those areas were: education, health, justice, security, agriculture and infrastructure.

Okechukwu Ibeanu, Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous wastes on the enjoyment of human rights, in presenting his report, said since the inception of his mandate, the movement of hazardous wastes and products across the globe, and particularly from developed to developing countries continued to flourish. Many developing countries traded in hazardous products and toxic wastes due to poverty and the need to ensure development. As to his report in Ukraine, the Special Rapporteur noted that one of the key environmental challenges faced by the country was the accumulation of huge stockpiles of pesticides. With regard to his report on Tanzania, he noted with concern the plight of artisanal miners who extracted minerals using toxic chemicals without appropriate safety equipment.

Ukraine and Tanzania spoke as concerned countries.

Leila Zerrougui, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, in presenting her report, noted that during 2007, the Working Group had held three annual sessions, had answered to 169 urgent calls and had adopted 40 opinions concerning 146 people. In 24 of the 40 cases, the Working Group had estimated that the deprivation of liberty was of arbitrary nature. In the majority of cases, concerned governments had provided the Working Group with all required information. Other examined situations included secret detentions, illegal transfers and the judgment of civilians by military courts. The Group had pronounced itself on all these questions. During 2007, the Working Group had visited Norway, Equatorial Guinea and Angola, as well as Mauritania, said Ms. Zerrougui. The Group had also been officially invited by the United States, Italy, Malta and Senegal.

Norway, Equatorial Guinea and Angola spoke as concerned countries.

Jose Luis Gomez del Prado, Chairman of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of impeding the right of peoples to self-determination, in presenting his report, said that there was an emergence of a flourishing private military and security industry. As such, traditional mercenaries were being absorbed by these private security companies and the recruitment of private security guards was a global phenomenon, which occurred in all geopolitical regions of the world. However, while the use of “private soldiers”, “security guards” or “independent contractors” by transnational private security companies in Iraq and Afghanistan corresponded to the same activities stipulated in article 1 of the International Convention of 1989, the legal definition of the Convention did not apply easily to them. He stated that in information received during the missions carried out by the Working Group in Honduras, Ecuador, Peru, Chile and Fiji, security guards recruited by private companies were armed with automatic rifles, and sometimes even anti-tank bazookas.

Peru and Chile spoke as concerned countries.

Speaking in the interactive dialogue this morning on the reports on toxic and dangerous products, arbitrary detention and mercenaries were delegates from Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement and Nigeria.

Those speaking during the discussion on the report presented by the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants were delegates from Sri Lanka, Ecuador, Russian Federation, Pakistan, Philippines, Algeria, Bangladesh, Turkey, Nigeria, Slovenia, Brazil, Indonesia, Senegal, Mauritania and Morocco.

Also speaking were representatives of Human Rights Advocates, International Committee for the Respect and the Application of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, in a joint statement with Action internationale pour la paix et le développement dans la région des Grands Lacs, American Civil Liberties Union, Permanent Assembly for Human Rights (APDH), and Association of World Citizens.

At 3 p.m. this afternoon, the Council will continue its interactive dialogue on the reports on toxic and dangerous products, arbitrary detention and mercenaries after which it will begin its discussion on the reports presented by the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances, the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography and the Special Rapporteur on torture.

Statement by Minister of Justice of Timor-Leste

LUCIA MARIA BRANDAO F. LOBATO, Minister of Justice of Timor-Leste, at the onset of her speech, conveyed the message of President Jose-Ramos Horta whose health was improving every day. As he came out of his coma his message was of peace and a call for no revenge. The fight of Timor-Leste for independence had passed through the Human Rights Council. Timor-Leste had ratified all human rights conventions and was one of the first signatories of the Geneva Declaration on armed violence and development, which aimed to develop measures to enhance security for all, thus laying the ground for the Declaration. Timor-Leste was extremely challenged with its capacity building required to stimulate the economy and to strengthen the Government. Thus measures to combat poverty had to enhance education, social development and strengthen law and order and democracy. Many challenges lay ahead of the people of Timor-Leste. Violence was not the way to achieve it. Timor-Leste was developing diverse programmes or activities to encourage further growth on the building and strengthening of national institutions to promote and protect human rights and democracy under the rule of law.

Among its successes was the establishment of the National Human Rights Action Plan of Timor-Leste, which involved widespread public engagement and identified six priority areas, the Minister said. Those areas were: education, health, justice, security, agriculture and infrastructure. Indicators for Timor-Leste showed that the country continued to be confronted with significant challenges in health, education, infrastructure, with high levels of poverty, significant mortality rates, malnourishment in infants and young children and poor rates of literacy. Moreover, psychological and physical violence against women and girls remained a serious and deeply ingrained social problem in Timor-Leste that required immediate attention. Significant challenges also remained for the institutions of law and order. In terms of the judiciary, serious limitations in recruiting and training of qualified judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys coupled with a lack of effective and efficient case management within the judicial system had resulted in delays in bringing matters to trial.

The Human Rights Council was of particular importance to the people of Timor-Leste due to their difficult history, struggle for self-determination and international solidarity that Timor-Leste had benefited from, Ms. Lobato added. Despite of the recent setbacks in the process of State-building, the leadership and the people were even more committed to democracy and human rights and Timor-Leste remained a vibrant and free society.

Documents on Report on Migrants

The Council has before it the annual report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights
of migrants, Jorge Bustamante (A/HRC/7/12 and Add.1-2), which summarizes the activities of the Special Rapporteur in 2007, including visits requested and undertaken, and communications and replies received. A thematic section highlights some key challenges with regard to the criminalization of irregular migration, and outlines some elements for State responsibility with regard to the protection of irregular migrants. It draws attention to the increasing criminalization of irregular migration and the abuses of migrants during all phases of the migration process. This criminalization is linked in many countries to persistent anti-migrant sentiments, which is often reflected in policies and institutional frameworks designed to manage migratory flows, often in a purely restrictive manner. There are also reports of greater criminalization of migration offences and cross-national collaboration by police and other authorities, which have in certain cases resulted in increased violations against migrants. The recommendations offered to States focus on the applicable legal framework for protection and the general trends observed. As a basic principle, States are urged to put the protection of migrants, regardless of their status or mode of entry, at the core of immigration policies.

Addendum one contains, on a country-by-country basis, summaries of general and individual allegations, as well as urgent appeals transmitted to Governments in 2007, concerning 23 countries, as well as replies received before 1 February 2008, along with observations by the Special Rapporteur, where applicable. It also includes a section on overall trends and observations on communications made during this period.

Addendum two is the report of the Special Rapporteur on his 2007 mission to the United States, where the Special Rapporteur had serious concerns about the situation of migrants, including indefinite detentions; lack of due process for non-citizens in the contest of deportation proceedings; immigrant detainees kept in solitary confinement, with lights kept on 24 hours a day, often in extreme heat and cold; and the fact that, the United States now detains over 230,000 people a year – more than three times the number it held nine years ago. The Special Rapporteur concludes that the United States has failed to adhere to its international obligations to make the human rights of the 37.5 million migrants living in the country a national priority, using a comprehensive and coordinated national policy based on clear international obligations, and addresses a number of recommendations to the Government.

For the presentation of the reports by the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, Jorge Bustamante, please see press release HRC/08/16 of 7 March 2008.

Discussion on Report of Special Rapporteur on Human Rights of Migrants

AMEER AJWAD OMER LEBBE (Sri Lanka) said that migration and human rights were increasingly major issues of concern for the international community, with an estimated 200 million migrants the world over and women accounting for half of this number. The time had come for the world to revisit and re-emphasize the basic human obligations to fellow human beings. It was necessary to recognize that migrant workers and their families were human beings with rights and were active agents in every society. The Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families was a broad-based instrument which aimed to assist Governments in developing strategies to prevent illegal migration movements. However, despite the intrinsically progressive nature of the Convention, ratifications remained far below expectations.

JUAN HOLGUIN (Ecuador) said that on the criminalization of irregular migration, the President of Ecuador had called lately to stop naming any human being as illegal. Ecuador supported the free movement of goods and capitals in order to seek maximum profit. But at the same time the free movement of people looking for a job was forbidden. This was unsustainable and unethical. Migratory policies should respect all human rights, especially socio-economic rights in this case.

SEMEN LYAPICHEV (Russian Federation) said the Russian Federation shared the concern of the international community as regards to the problem of the human rights of migrants. Over the last 15 years steps had been taken in the Russian Federation to strengthen the situation of migrants in the country in accordance which international standards. These steps had led to the reduction on the level of illegal migration. Unfortunately, crime among migrants remained high in the Russian Federation despite the efforts of the State and host countries, although concerted steps had been continuing to reverse
these trends.

MARGHOOB SALEEM BUTT (Pakistan) said that it was the right of all States to safeguard their borders as well as regulate their migration policies. However, in doing so, the human rights of irregular migrants should not be ignored. Pakistan agreed with the Special Rapporteur’s evaluation that irregular migration did not constitute a criminal act but rather an administrative breach of rules. Issues such as technical assistance at regional and international levels would need to be integrated in a broader strategy to deal with the phenomenon of migration in a sustainable manner. It was the responsibility of all States, regardless of the legal status of migrants, to ensure adherence to fundamental human rights norms and ensure that all migrants were treated with dignity, irrespective of colour, creed or religion.

DENIS Y. LEPATAN (Philippines) said that migrants also had human rights and these should be respected by States, while enacting and enabling national migration law. Serious concerns were expressed over what was being done in certain countries. The Special Rapporteur was thanked for indicating in his report that migrants were easy victims of trafficking, especially women and children. If human rights laws were universal, then the Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families should be taken into account worldwide. In pursuit of an Asian vision of one caring and sharing community, the Philippines was fully committed to the respect of the human rights of migrants.

LARBI DJACTA (Algeria) said Algeria supported the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur calling on Member States to ratify the Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families and to bring their national legislation in line with the instrument accordingly. Algeria noted with deep alarm that a number of developed countries had failed to ratify the Convention. Yet these countries reaffirmed their commitments to human rights. The Convention provided a legal basis for the protection of the human rights of migrants. Algeria called on these countries to be consistent in the area of the promotion and protection of human rights. Algeria attached great importance to these rights. The Algerian Constitution provided a guarantee that foreigners who illegally resided in Algeria were still protected. Algeria was making enormous efforts to combat violations to legislation which compromised the right of migrants. At the regional level, Algeria was making efforts in dialogue mechanisms with Mediterranean countries and in European fora.

MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh) agreed with the Special Rapporteur that it was the responsibility of each State to ensure that fundamental human rights norms were applied and that all migrants were treated with dignity. Migrant workers often faced prejudice and marginalization. Racism and xenophobia were a particular problem, especially in Western countries. By linking anti-terrorism measures and immigration control in the context of the “war on terror”, many governments had in most cases unintentionally fuelled xenophobia against migrants and refugees. Specific attention should be paid to detainees, victims, women, children, and other vulnerable groups.

FATIH ULUSOY (Turkey) said that in view of its geographical location, Turkey was inevitably affected by human trafficking, illegal migration as well as regular migration. With regard to human trafficking, Turkey had established a national task force to fight this phenomenon. A report on Turkey’s efforts was accessible on the Internet. Turkey also had participated at the Vienna Forum to Fight Human Trafficking. Closer international cooperation was required in this field. Turkey had ratified the Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families in 1990. Turkey supported the equal right of migrants. It also supported the projects carried out by the Alliance of Civilizations.

OBINNA ONOWU (Nigeria) said the rapid increase in international migration had continued to impact Nigeria’s desire to ensure a dignified life and respect for the rights of migrants. It was the view of Nigeria that the vulnerability of unskilled or irregular migrant workers whose abuse was seldom reported was troubling. Violations had been generally under recorded and a policy framework to address these reoccurring problems was non-existent. Nigeria believed that policies which encouraged the exploitation, mass expulsion and persecution of migrants in destination countries undermined the norms enshrined in the various international human rights and labour instruments designed to promote and protect the human rights of all persons. Moreover, Nigeria viewed the protection of the human rights of migrants as an essential component of a comprehensive migration management system. To this end, Nigeria had commenced the process of developing a national policy on migration that would reflect its commitment under the various international, regional and national instruments to protect and enhance the rights of migrants.

ANTON NOVAK (Slovenia), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the European Union, as one of the big receptors of migrants in the world, firmly believed that the human rights of these individuals should be protected at any time. The protection of these individuals was a matter of utmost importance and a shared responsibility. There was a need for dialogue and cooperation to face this common challenge. The European Union asked the Special Rapporteur about the ways in which the international community could work together in order to reduce the flows of irregular migrants, given the fact that these people were especially vulnerable to all kinds of abuses, trafficking and exploitation. Was there a role for the UN system in the effort by States to inform potential migrants about the risks associated with smuggling and trafficking operations. .

MURILO VIEIRA KOMNISKI (Brazil) said that the criminalisation of migration and States’ responsibilities in the protection of migrants were important issues. The number of emigrated Brazilian people had very much risen over the last year, thus Brazil was committed to the protection of their human rights. In many countries, migrants had been instrumental in the development of their host country. Migrants contributed to the socio-economic fabric, and their rights had to be respected. Brazil was recognising that the Global Forum on Migration and Development was the sole mechanism where all countries could analyse the matter in a focused manner.

BUDI UTOMO (Indonesia) said, as a country of origin, Indonesia was well able to understand many of the complex issues and challenges that continued to plague migrants in situ and which thereby rendered the respect of their fundamental freedoms difficult. In this regard, Indonesia believed in the importance of close cooperation between the countries of origin and destination, particularly through the creation of well established channels and protection strategies. In this context, the Special Rapporteur was asked to provide some clarifications as to this ongoing process, in particular whether he felt if there was a growing trend towards the exclusion of migrants to the detriment of the socio-economic well-being of destination countries. Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur was asked whether he agreed that the fact the “irregular migration continues to persist” was a sign of the growing economic unease which could not be resolved merely by measures such as creating zones of exclusion. Indonesia believed that many of the challenges must be dealt with through bilateral and multilateral cooperation.

BABACAR CARLOS MBAYE (Senegal) said that Senegal had given a favourable response to the Special Rapporteur’s request to visit Senegal and had shown its openness to cooperate with the Special Procedures. While Senegal was a country of origin and transit, it was also a country which welcomed migrants. As the gateway to Western Africa, Senegal was committed to continental integration and was home for all Africans. Senegal was a passage point to Europe but also a destination for many Africans, and even Asians. It would be difficult to manage international migration without a view for economic development and the respect for human dignity.

MOUNINA MINT ABDELLAH (Mauritania) said that Mauritania, in light of the recent changes in the country and in order to establish a law based on human rights, including those of migrants, had hosted visits by two Special Rapporteurs. The Special Rapporteurs’ conclusions and recommendations were welcomed. All countries were called upon to adhere to the Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families. Migration was a very much important topic.

MOHAMMED LOULICHKI (Morocco) said the question of migration was one of the new challenges the international community must face up to and meet in a spirit of pragmatism, solidarity and partnership. Morocco was both a country of transit and destination and therefore attached great importance to this topic. Morocco had take initiatives at the national and regional levels to promote dialogue in this regard. Morocco had always called for a global comprehensive approach taking into account the deep seated causes of migration and had always given priority to national and regional cooperation to manage this phenomenon. It was noted that last year, the King of Morocco had introduced an act to give support to Moroccans living abroad. Morocco would continue to display its solid international commitment to the rights of migrants and fully supported the Special Rapporteur’s recommendations.

MARY JOHNSON, of Human Rights Advocates, said that although the right to life was the fundamental human right, it was being violated at militarized borders in countries that applied a migration policy of prevention through deterrence. As a result, migrants followed more dangerous paths into countries. In 2007, at least 372 migrants were found dead at the border between the United States and Mexico. Moreover, nearly 12,000 migrants had died trying to enter the European Union since 1988. Human Rights Advocates also spoke out against the deplorable conditions in migration detention centres. Finally, while the right to freedom of association was a core labour right, migrants did not always enjoy this right because of discrimination based on their immigration status.

EMMANUEL NDUWAYEZU, of International Committee for the Respect and the Application of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, in a joint statement with Action internationale pour la paix et le développement dans la région des Grands Lacs, said that the international community had made the fight against poverty its principal objective during the 1995 World Summit and many had made statements and spoken about this issue. However, Africa remained behind as noted by the United Nations Development Programme. Despite all these statements, Africa was a victim of the imposed selective globalization. The recent failure of negotiations between the European Union and Africa showed that there was an absence of political will to take into account the needs of Africa. Numerous violations of the human rights of African migrant workers were taking place, especially in the rich countries.

JENNIFER TURNER, of American Civil Liberties Union, urged the Council to call for the adoption of appropriate measures to address the widespread violations of the human rights of migrants in the United States. The Union was concerned about the overuse of immigration arbitrary detention under mandatory detention laws, and poor conditions in immigration detention facilities in the United States. The Union was also concerned about the expansion of immigration border enforcement activities that violated human rights standards, and about the deterioration of federal protection of migrant workers. The Union called upon the United States Government to adopt concrete measures to protect the human rights of all migrants.

BRENDA VUKOVIC, of Permanent Assembly for Human Rights, said that while progress had been made on migration laws in Argentina, such as the programme for migrants outside MERCOSUR, there was an important need to reform regional and bilateral cooperation on human rights norms. A discrepancy existed between the stated goals of the Government and the realities on the ground. The negative concept of migration in Argentina’s Governmental agencies had to be addressed. Direct observations in the field showed that there was an abuse of power by officials. As such, training and awareness raising programmes should be implemented for people in charge of migration as well as border guards. There was also a greater need for dissemination campaigns on the issue of migration.

GENEVIEVE JOURDAN, of Association of World Citizens, said that everyday violations of human rights were taking place. Many testimonies showed that migrants had a precarious situation. In many cases marriages between foreigners and nationals was becoming impossible. How could human rights be ensured in this light? In Swiss law, there was an article against abuses of marriages. This was alarming. Marriages and partnerships could be cancelled in the Swiss law. This was not compatible with the rights of children.

Reports on Toxic and Dangerous Wastes, Arbitrary Detention and Mercenaries

The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights, Okechukwu Ibeanu (A/HRC/7/21 and Add.1-3), which contains a summary of the activities of the Special Rapporteur. In view of the review of the Special Procedure mandates by the Council, the Special Rapporteur outlines the main conclusions developed under the mandate concerning the challenges posed by the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes to the enjoyment of human rights. The report includes a section highlighting the importance of the right to information and participation in this regard, including a discussion of current international and regional legal frameworks on the rights to information and participation. Reference is also made to the different forms of implementation and monitoring mechanisms that can be used at the national level. In conclusions and recommendations, the Special Rapporteur suggests that the Council may want to recognize explicitly the right to information as a precondition for good governance and the realization of all other human rights. The Special Rapporteur also appeals to developed and developing States to adhere more strictly to international normative frameworks, as well as regional and other arrangements, with regard to the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products. He further emphasizes that developed countries must not see developing nations as “cheap dumping grounds” to get rid of unwanted and hazardous products and wastes.

The first addendum to the report contains a summary of communications sent to and replies received from Governments and other stakeholders in 2006 and 2007. [Not currently available.]

Addendum two contains the report of the Special Rapporteur on his country visit to Ukraine from 22 to 30 January 2007. [Not currently available.]

A third addendum contains a preliminary note on the Special Rapporteur's mission to Tanzania, from 21 to 30 January 2008. The large volume of unregulated small-scale mining that is taking place around the country, in particular, is the subject of concern. In some cases, the miners do not have adequate information about the impact mercury can have on their health and the dangers of the improper disposal of tailings and their effect on their livelihood and the environment. Among recommendations, the Special Rapporteur urges the Government and other stakeholders to step up efforts to inform the public of the risks posed by mining as well as by toxic chemicals used in the textile industries and tanneries. The Government is also urged to develop a database of mining-related illnesses that have affected the communities that inhabit the mining areas.

The Council has before it the report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention by its Chairperson-Rapporteur Leïla Zerrougui (A/HRC/7/4 and Add.2-4), which covers the activities of the Working Group in 2007, including urgent appeals to Governments and efforts to develop its follow-up procedure. It identifies several shortcomings in connection with the detention of illegal immigrants and asylum-seekers, and analyses the situation of certain vulnerable groups of detainees and prisoners susceptible to sexual violence by co-inmates and prison staff, including minors, the mentally disabled, indigenous people, and the poor. It also reiterates concerns that states of emergency are a root cause of arbitrary detentions, as well as concerns about the recourse to military, special or emergency codes, especially in the context of countering terrorism. The question of registration systems in detention facilities as well as the establishment by law of time limits for pre-trial detention is also treated. Among the Working Group's recommendations are that States should establish an effective complaint procedure for detainees; that the Human Rights Council carry out an in depth urgent deliberation on illegal immigrants and asylum-seekers in detention around the world; and that a seminar be organized on that issue. It also recommends that States use detention of these persons only as a last resort.

Addendum 2 is the report of the Working Group on its mission to Norway in 2007, commending that country for its susceptibility to recommendations from internal and international control bodies and courts and numerous best practices were observed in the well functioning criminal justice and penitentiary systems in Norway, which features checks and balances between independent institutions safeguarding against arbitrary detention and well-trained and professional prison staff. The legal aid scheme for the defence counsel is exemplary. In particular, the Working Group lauds the Government for its policy to avoid taking juveniles between the age of 15 and 18 into custody. Of concern were the frequency of use of partial or total isolation during remand and after sentencing in Norway, and the issue of preventive detention, which is imposed when a sentence for a specific prison term is considered to be insufficient to protect society from an offender convicted for a serious (violent) crime.

The third addendum is the report of the Working Group on its mission to Equatorial Guinea, undertaken from 8 to 13 July 2008. [Currently available in Spanish only.]

Addendum 4 is the report on the Working Group's 2007 mission to Angola, which notes that, although the legacy of civil war still poses tremendous challenges, the Government has embarked on a process of comprehensive judicial reform. A National Human Rights Institution, the Office of the Ombudsman, an internal Police Oversight Service and Provincial Human Rights Committees, albeit not yet fully operational, have been established. Despite those efforts, concerns remain about the weak role judges play in the current system, and the lack of a genuine right to challenge detention orders. Other concerns include that time limits for suspects to be presented before a magistrate are virtually never adhered to and that pre-trial detainees often remain in detention after the expiration of the authorized time limit. Of particular concern is that minors below the age of 16 could be sent to prison at the instigation of judges and the prosecution. There is also a lack of complaint procedures; credible information that civilians are at times detained incommunicado at military institutions and are not produced before a judge; and alarming conditions in detention settings. The Working Group's recommendations focus on the field of inspection and control of prisons and other detention facilities, the situation of minors in detention, the legal framework governing pre-trial detention.

The Council has before it the report of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of people to self-determination by its Chairperson-Rapporteur, José Luis Gomez del Prado (A/HRC/7/7 and Add.1-5), which outlines activities undertaken by the Working Group during the reporting period, looking at transnational issues, including the privatization of warfare, the activities of private military and security companies, and extraterritorial and accountability issues. The report also addresses the status of the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, and sets out future activities to be carried out by the Working Group, in particular a process of regional consultations with States, leading to a global round table. A final section contains conclusions and recommendations, inter alia, that encouraging regional and other intergovernmental organizations, in particular the European Union and the Organization of American States, to elaborate a common system to regulate private military and security companies exporting their services abroad; and States from which private military and security companies export military assistance, consultancy and security services are urged to avoid granting immunity to these companies and their personnel.

A first addendum to the report contains summaries of general and individual allegations, transmitted to Australia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Honduras, Iraq, Peru and the United States by the Working Group from the period of 1 January to 30 September 2007, including replies received during the same period.

Addendum two is the report of the Working Group mission to Peru in 2007. Peru is commended for its accession to the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, and for the Congressional draft bill prohibiting Peruvians from providing security services in armed conflict zones. The Group continues to be concerned, however, at the recruitment of Peruvians by Peruvian and American companies and at the situation they face in Afghanistan and Iraq in fulfilling contracts for the United States Department of State. There appear to have been contractual irregularities, very harsh working conditions, excessive working hours, non-payment of salaries, ill-treatment and isolation, neglect of basic needs, lack of medical attention, as well as the deaths in tragic circumstances of at least two Peruvians. Among other recommendations, Peru should strengthen its normative framework, and keep transparent registers of private security companies, as well as a system of regular inspections.

Addendum three contains the report of the Working Group on its 2007 visit to Fiji, in which it expresses concern that in a number of instances, the security-related functions carried out by Fijians abroad through private military and security companies may qualify as mercenary-related activities. Unemployment, underemployment, a migratory population, and largely unmonitored activities of private security companies in Fiji have facilitated such recruitment in Fiji for work. There is an absence of national legislation and measures in Fiji to effectively address these issues, and the Fiji authorities are encouraged to take positive action in order to ensure that private military and security companies in Fiji operate within a legal framework in full accordance with international human rights standards. Among other recommendations are the adoption of measures to address issues of reintegration and post-traumatic stress disorder in individuals returning from security work abroad through the establishment of a comprehensive system of debriefing and professional counselling.

A fourth addendum is the report of the Working Group's mission to Chile, which commends Chile for actions to curtail the phenomenon of the recruitment of former Chilean military and police personnel to work in Iraq, including preliminary draft of a bill concerning Chile’s accession to the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries. The Working Group is concerned at the recruitment, training and contracting of Chileans to work abroad with private security companies in Iraq - a phenomenon that emerged in 2003. Although hired as “independent contractors” or “security guards”, these persons were provided military training in the United States of America, Jordan or Iraq and ultimately carried out military functions. The Working Group is further concerned at information received alleging abuses of the human rights of indigenous communities by employees of private security firms contracted by forestry companies. Recommendations include that, investigations of foreign security companies that recruited Chileans to go to Iraq by the competent authorities are completed as soon as possible, and that Chile establish a body at the highest level endowed with authority and charged with monitoring both private security companies and new forms of mercenarism.

The fifth addendum is not currently available.

Presentation of Reports of Special Procedures on Toxic and Dangerous Products, Arbitrary Detention and Mercenaries

OKECHUKWU IBEANU, Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights, said since the inception of his mandate, the movement of hazardous wastes and products across the globe, and particularly from developed to developing countries continued to flourish. Many developing countries traded in hazardous products and toxic wastes due to poverty and the need to ensure development. Alternative income-generating activities must be pursued by countries that too often did not process the technical knowledge and expensive technologies necessary for the safe handling and disposal of toxic and dangerous products and wastes. Developed countries could offer higher environmental standards and more advanced technology to dispose of such dangerous products and wastes. Yet they often preferred to send hazardous waste to developing countries due to the cost advantage, through fully aware that the developing countries did not have the technology or expertise to process such wastes safely.

While noting that the theme of his report this year was on the right to information and participation in relation to his mandate, Mr. Ibeanu noted that he continued to receive information on alleged violations to the right to information regarding environmental matters and the impact on affected populations. Providing public access to information when requested was imperative for the prevention of human rights violations and the protection of the environment. Transnational corporations should not pay lip service only to corporate social responsibility issues, including human rights responsibilities. Governments should be extremely careful not to abuse national security clauses that allowed the withholding of specific information. Rather, they should ensure such clauses were only used in conformity with the relevant derogation or limitation clauses reflected by international human rights instruments.

With regard to his visit to Ukraine, the Special Rapporteur noted that one of the key environmental challenges faced by the country was the accumulation of huge stockpiles of pesticides. The Government should envisage offering incentives in order for the implementation of programmes to be effective. As to his visit to Tanzania, the Special Rapporteur noted that the country had a comprehensive set of laws and subsidiary instruments to deal with the particular issue of toxic and dangerous products waste. Among his concerns on the country report related to the plight of artisanal miners who extracted minerals using toxic chemicals without appropriate safety equipment. It was imperative that the Government, in cooperation with the United Nations Country Team and its donor partners, carried out major sensitization campaigns to educate the public on the dangers of such chemicals and provide subsidies for the purchase of safety equipment.

LEÏLA ZERROUGUI, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, presenting her report, said that the mandate of the Working Group on arbitrary detention had been extended for three years by the Council in 2007, during the review, improvement and rationalization of mandates. The membership of the Working Group would be renewed during this year. During 2007, the Working Group had held three annual sessions, had answered to 169 urgent calls and had adopted 40 opinions concerning 146 people. In 24 of the 40 cases, the Working Group had estimated that the deprivation of liberty was of arbitrary nature. In the majority of cases, concerned governments had provided the Working Group with all required information. Other examined situations included secret detentions, illegal transfers and the judgment of civilians by military courts. The Group had pronounced itself on all these questions. An opinion had also been adopted concerning Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi. Her detention was considered as arbitrary and the Working Group called for her release. The Working Group had also gone back to opinions it had expressed in the past. The first recommendation made in this year’s report addressed the Human Rights Council The Council was asked to urgently organise a debate in order to define measures in order to stop the violations of the rights of migrants and asylum seekers. The Group had observed preoccupying tendencies in this regard. The Group’s report gave an overview of numerous problems observed concerning the detention of foreigners. States were reminded of their obligation to protect their detainees. Also, all places of detentions should have a system of record, in order to prevent arbitrary detention.

During 2007, the Working Group had visited Norway, Equatorial Guinea and Angola, as well as Mauritania, said Ms. Zerrougui. The Group had also been officially invited by the United States, Italy, Malta and Senegal. Appreciation was expressed to the Governments for their cooperation, particularly those of the African Countries. On its visit in Norway, the Group had visited 12 places of detentions. The exemplary practices in the functioning of the penal and penitentiary justice were underlined. Minors were not placed in detention as often as possible. However, the use of partial and total isolation during provisory detention was preoccupying. On the visit in Equatorial Guinea, the Working Group had been able to meet in private with approximately 200 detainees. The new laws and measures to improve the conditions in places of detentions were welcomed. However there were still some judicial norms as a heritage from the colonial period in place. These were incompatible with international norms. On the visit in Angola, nine places of detentions were visited and 400 detainees had been interviewed. The effort of the Government to advance the respect of human rights was welcomed. The Government was encouraged to further the judicial and institutional reforms. On the visit in Mauritania, the Working Group noted that the Government had engaged in a profound reform of its judicial and institutional systems, with the aim of reinforcing democracy. The international community and the High Commissioner for Human Rights were requested to provide technical and financial help to this process.

JOSE LUIS GOMEZ DEL PRADO, Chairman of the Working Group on the Use of Mercenaries as a Means of Impeding the Right of Peoples to Self-Determination, said that there was an emergence of a flourishing private military and security industry. As such, traditional mercenaries were being absorbed by these private security companies. The recruitment of private security guards was a global phenomenon which occurred in all geopolitical regions of the world. However, while the use of “private soldiers”, “security guards” or “independent contractors” by transnational private security companies in Iraq and Afghanistan corresponded to the same activities stipulated in article 1 of the International Convention of 1989, the legal definition of the Convention did not apply easily to them. Although contracting companies worked directly for the Government of the United States, many subcontracted with other companies abroad, which in turn selected and recruited citizens of developing countries with a military or police background. As such, transnational security companies had “created a labyrinth of contracts and subcontracts that [were] difficult to unravel”.

Mr. Gómez del Prado stated that in information received during the missions carried out by the Working Group in Honduras, Ecuador, Peru, Chile and Fiji, security guards recruited by private companies were armed with automatic rifles, and sometimes even anti-tank bazookas. In some cases, they used weapons prohibited by the laws of war. Moreover, a great number of “security guards” interviewed during these missions complained about the contractual irregularities, bad working conditions, overcrowding, excessive working hours, unpaid salaries, degrading treatment and isolation, as well as a lack of attention to their basic needs such as health and hygiene. Among the private guards or independent contractors working in Iraq, it was estimated that 1,000 persons had died and 13,000 had been injured. The recruitment of these security guards was indeed paradoxical, particularly in the case of Iraq, where the official position of some governments was to oppose intervention or preventive war and yet the citizens of these countries were taking active part as “independent contractors” in this armed conflict. The use of such private security guards also raised important questions regarding their accountability at the parliamentary level, as had been demonstrated by the numerous cases of human rights violations that had been left unpunished. Some of the most dreadful examples were the cases of torture in the Abu Ghraib detention centre and the massacre of 16 September 2007 in Baghdad, in which 17 civilians died, including women and children, and another 20 people were injured as a result of indiscriminate cross-fire by employees of a private security company.

Mr. Gómez del Prado also stated that private military and security companies were gradually taking over functions that, until recently, constituted the basis of the sovereignty of the State as the single holder of the monopoly over the legitimate use of force. In the countries visited by the Working Group, an increased tendency to outsource the use of force to private security companies was observed. The same trend was also taking place for the police forces. In some countries, private security companies hired members of the police outside their normal working hours, using State assets like uniforms, weapons and munitions. In conclusion, he called upon States to regulate and oversee private military and security companies; not to grant immunity to their personnel; and to investigate and bring to justice those security guards who may have committed crimes and human rights violations in Iraq and other places. He also reminded the Council that the Working Group would carry out missions in the next months following the invitations extended by the United Kingdom and Afghanistan. Furthermore, it would continue its consultations with the delegations of Armenia, Chad, the Central African Republic, Colombia, Ghana, Equatorial Guinea, Iraq, Papua New Guinea, South Africa, the United States and Zimbabwe.

Statements by Concerned Countries

VOLODYMYR VASSYLENKO (Ukraine), speaking as a concerned country, said the Government of Ukraine and Ukrainian society had had to deal with the stockpiles of toxic and dangerous wastes inherited from the former Soviet Union. The Special Rapporteur on the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes had properly grasped the real scope of the problems that Ukraine was facing. In general, his observations, assessments and recommendations were rather sound and aimed at resolving outstanding issues as well as preventing the illicit movement of the toxic wastes and dangerous products. The recommendations of the Special Rapporteur were already being carefully studied and were under consideration of relevant governmental agencies of Ukraine.

ALESIA NDUNGURU (Tanzania), speaking as a concerned country, said it was gratifying to note that despite a few shortcomings, the Special Rapporteur on illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes was satisfied with the courtesy and cooperation afforded to him throughout his mission. It was noteworthy that Tanzania was party to major international treaties addressing the issue of toxic wastes, namely, the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade, and the Basel Convention on Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Waste and their Disposal, among others. However, since Tanzania maintained a dualist legal system, the Government had enacted its laws incorporating these international treaties. It the same vein, Tanzania had formulated relevant policy directives in order to translate the enacted laws into national plans and programmes of action. The Environmental Management Act of 2004 and the Revised Edition of the Mining Act of 2006 provided a comprehensive framework of the efforts being undertaken by the Government to remedy the negative effects of toxic chemicals and wastes.

BEATE STIRO (Norway), speaking as a concerned country, said the Government of Norway was pleased that the Working Group on arbitrary detention did not find any cases of arbitrary detention during its visits. The Working Group in its report had raised some issues of concern and made five concrete recommendations to the Government. Norway took the Working Group’s issues of concern and the recommendations from the report very seriously. With regard to the recommendation to arrange a survey on applications for remand and restrictions, and partial and complete isolation in pretrial detention, it was noted that such a survey would be arranged by the Director of Public Prosecution to follow up on a survey conducted in 1999. Moreover, Norway would consider establishing a central body independent of the Correctional Services to conduct surveillance, quality assurance and supervision. The Government had also revised the guidelines for “Infoflyt” and would, in accordance with the Working Group’s recommendation, continue to monitor the system and improve it when necessary. The Norwegian Government would also consider the proposal concerning efforts to resolve conflicts of competence between correctional service and health-care authorities with respect to the admission of mentally ill prison inmates to psychiatric hospitals, and propose that this could be achieved by creating an independent commission in which all stakeholders were represented.

JUAN BAUTISTA NVO MANGUE OBAMA (Equatorial Guinea), speaking as a concerned country, said that the Working Group on arbitrary detention had visited Equatorial Guinea in 2007 and had had the opportunity to visit places of detention without any restrictions. Equatorial Guinea was a signatory of several human rights conventions and was thus committed to the protection of human rights. The Government was currently studying the Working Group’s report. On the judiciary system, there was a process of selection for people wanting to join the judiciary. Concerning the four alleged disappeared persons, they had been judged in court. It was the Government’s aspiration to promote, guarantee and protect human rights.

ARCANJO MARIA DO NASCIMENTO (Angola), speaking as a concerned country, expressed its deep regret to the Working Group on arbitrary detention for the difficulties it encountered during the visit to the military prison in Cabinda and the transit centre for illegal migrants in Viana and assured the Group that this would not happen again. Angola was in an undergoing process of tremendous change, which entailed the entire overhaul of the Angolan legal framework that was inherited from colonial rule. As part of this reform process, the two main instruments of criminal law, the penal code and the criminal procedure code, were being advised and updated. While Angola welcomed the efforts of the authors of the Working Group’s report, it still fell short from accurately reflecting the structure of the Angolan judiciary. In particular, it was wrong to say that the Ministry of Interior played the central role in the administration of justice as it could not interfere with the powers of Angolan courts. Furthermore, there was a great deal of confusion in the report with regards to the criminal procedure.

ALEJANDRO NEYRA SANCHEZ (Peru), speaking as a concerned country, recalled that the Government of Peru had previously signed an agreement to allow Special Procedures of the United Nations system to enter its country to conduct their work, which was a clear expression of the Government’s commitment to human rights. Peru had made its utmost efforts to ensure that the Working Group on mercenaries would be able to meet with all concerned parties and conduct their work in the country. The recommendations in the report presented a great contribution to help Peru overcome and avoid new cases that might threaten the lives of those in question. Specifically, Peru had adopted a series of measures on the recruitment of mercenaries and had become the fifth country to ratify the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries. Peru’s national authorities were willing and committed to scale up efforts undertaken to overcome certain problems which Peru had come across in its fight against terrorism. A range of activities had been taken to align national laws with the Convention and a Bill was currently being reviewed on financing of mercenaries.

JUAN MARTABIT (Chile), speaking as a concerned country, said that, as pointed out by the President of Chile during her statement before the Human Rights Council, Chile was fully committed to support the work of human rights instruments. But these Special Procedures should only focus on their mandates. The International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries did not have an effective definition for “mercenaries” and it was vague on the work of private security companies which operated in countries in conflict. Also, it was necessary to be more precise about the sources and facts that gave rise to investigations. More details were needed when conducting an investigation. Throughout the report, the same way of dealing with facts was seen and the Working Group seemed not to be sure about the facts. Despite this, Chile very much welcomed the Working Group’s visit and had implemented the Working Group recommendations.

Interactive Dialogue on Reports on Toxic and Dangerous Products, Arbitrary Detention and Mercenaries

MARGHOOB SALEEM BUTT (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), urged the members of the Working Group on arbitrary detention to validate the information contained in the communications, as it would enable governments to respond expeditiously. He also stated that the rights of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the international covenants must be respected. With regards to the Working Group on mercenaries, the OIC recognized and drew attention to the fact that such privatization of warfare resulted in raising new legal questions when they were involved in massive violations of the human rights of local communities. As such, the Conference shared the concerns to reconcile the objectives of bringing more efficiency in establishing security through private security companies and the enjoyment of human rights by both personnel of these companies and the local populations where these personnel operated. In a series of questions to the Working Group on mercenaries, the OIC asked how to address the question of jurisdiction under international law regarding the accountability of private security personnel involved in egregious human rights violations in countries under occupation.

YURI GALA (Cuba), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said the Working Group on mercenaries had been doing praiseworthy work in implementing its mandate. Cuba shared the concerns expressed by the Working Group on the generally low priority given to this question by the international community. Cuba supported the proposal for the Working Group to have three sessions per year and called on the group to scale up its work in monitoring mercenaries’ activities. Cuba cited acts carried out by the United States’ authorities against the Cuban people. Private security companies were operating in a “grey zone” where they could easily violate human rights with impunity. Such was the case in Baghdad in Abu Ghraib and acts committed by the US-based company Blackwater. Taking into account the involvement of the United State, the Working Group should continue insisting with the United States’ authorities to be allowed to enter the country. As to the Working Group on arbitrary detention, the case of five Cuban political prisoners being held unjustly in United States prisons was raised. The Government of the United States had been manipulating the American Courts in this regard. In addition, the wives of two of these prisoners, who were present in the room, had been prevented from being able to visit their spouses. Cuba asked the Working Group to follow up on this case and called for the release of these five political prisoners.

MARTIN IHOEGHIAN UHOMOIBHI (Nigeria) said that it was now 20 years since the world had witnessed the horrors of toxic waste dumping in developed countries. A ban had been adopted in 1995, but had yet not entered into force due to the interpretation of the text of the Convention. Several other conventions had not yet been fully implemented either. Nigeria had become a party to the Basel Convention in 1991 and was in the process of domesticating all the relevant Conventions. The Convention, so far, had not been effectively implemented due to limited resources and lack of technical capacity. The international community had yet to pay appropriated attention to this issue. The dumping of waste in poor countries was seen as a solution by rich counties. The impact on health of millions of people was devastating. The work of the Special Rapporteur was fully supported.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC08017E