HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE WITH INDEPENDENT EXPERT ON HAITI AND DISCUSSES TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND CAPACITY-BUILDING
The Human Rights Council this afternoon held an interactive dialogue with the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Haiti, followed by a general debate on technical assistance and capacity-building.
Louis Joinet, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Haiti, said that he was taking the floor for the very last time, after more than 40 years of association with the United Nations. Over the past six years, he had been able to create links with different parties in Haiti, which were not always really open to dialogue and were also not often open to the return of the rule of law, as these groups were often linked to the mafia. He had also maintained contact with various Government officers; one day these would have to take the destiny of the people in their hands. The major steps accomplished over the last years included the re-establishment of an elected parliament and the election meant that the people of the country could come out with a long lasting situation. One of the problems was the non-existence of political parties as such as they had not taken root in the country yet.
Haiti, speaking as a concerned country, said Mr. Joinet had provided moral and technical support to the Haitian people. Haiti had the will to reform the administration and police with respect to human rights. However, in April 2008 the country was plunged into an institutional crisis as a result of the food shortage crisis. Violent demonstrations had led to the removal of the Prime Minister by 16 Senators of the Republic and since then the country had had a difficult time replacing him. The setting up of a new Government was essential for the setting up and promotion and protection of human rights. On the renewal of the mandate, Haiti believed that given the political state, it was difficult for the Government to make such a decision without the support of a full backed Government.
In the interactive dialogue with the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Haiti, delegations said that they attached great importance to the situation in Haiti. Mr. Joinet had established a reputation of trust over time with successive Haitian administrations. Haiti, as elsewhere, was a country where security and development were interlinked. Poverty and extreme poverty were present in the country. The consolidation of the rule of law was at the heart of the current issues that remained to be solved in Haiti. Mr. Joinet fought to deal with a number of issues that were of priority: an independent judiciary, the right to fair trial, training the police, army and armed forces in general, combating impunity, which was a system corroding the entire system in Haiti, and combating extreme poverty.
Speaking in the interactive dialogue on the situation of human rights in Haiti were the delegations of Canada, France, Uruguay, Luxembourg and Slovenia on behalf of the European Union.
In the general debate on technical assistance and capacity-building, delegations said the Council should support and promote the provision of technical assistance and capacity-building. At the same time this assistance and cooperation should contribute towards the prevention of human rights violations and facilitate a prompt response to human rights emergencies. The Council had a clear mandate to start afresh to think on technical cooperation in order to avoid reverting to the past practices of the Commission.
Speaking in the general debate about technical assistance and capacity-building were the delegations of Slovenia on behalf of the European Union and Sri Lanka.
Also speaking was Human Rights Watch.
Speaking in right of reply was Iran.
The Council will meet at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 18 June, when it is scheduled to appoint a number of Special Procedures mandate holders and take action on resolutions and decisions before closing its eighth regular session.
Presentation by Independent Expert on Human Rights in Haiti
LOUIS JOINET, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Haiti, presenting an oral report, said that he was now at the end of his six-year mandate. He thanked the former Commission and the Council for the trust placed in him. For painful personal reasons he had been unable to carry out his last mission to Haiti. He was also taking the floor for the very last time, after more than 40 years of association with the United Nations. Given this experience he had some observations he wanted to share. His first observation was that the exciting thing about a country mandate was to be able to undertake a real follow-up. As a second observation, he wondered how, as an Independent Expert, one should act when there was a peacekeeping force with a human rights section, among others, in the country. In such a context, an Independent Expert by virtue of being independent should take the opportunity to play a unique role and speak up even in some certain sensitive circumstances. The United Nations bodies, as they were in situ, they had to take into account the need and the constraints linked to the fact that they had to collaborate with the host country.
Mr. Joinet said that over the past six years, he had been able to create links with different parties which were not always really open to dialogue and were also not often open to the return of the rule of law, as these groups were often linked to the mafia. He had also maintained contact with various Government officers; one day these would have to take the destiny of the people in their hands. The major steps accomplished over the last years: the re-establishment of an elected parliament and the election meant that the people of the country could come out with a long lasting situation. However, the Prime Minister had been dismissed and there was still no Prime Minister and no Government. This showed that in Haiti and elsewhere, in order to return to the rule of law, it was not enough to conduct elections. One of the problems was also the non existence of political parties as such and they had not taken root in the country yet.
The hybrid system, half parliamentary and half presidential was scarcely viable and the ruling class did not have the will to make sure that the parliament was stable, and that there was an opposition. The politicians were still unable to respond to the needs of the people, noted Mr. Joiner. Further, the prohibition of dual nationality had also caused great controversy. It was not something that people in the Diaspora looked favourably upon. They were very unhappy about his prohibition. For some it was a question of mistrust going back to the period of Duvallier. Many of them wished to invest in the country and many were already contributing to the economy of the country.
Statement by Haiti as Concerned Country
JEAN-CLAUDE PIERRE (Haiti), speaking as a concerned country, congratulated the Special Rapporteur on his success. Haiti also paid tribute to the High Commissioner for human rights for her tremendous efforts, which led to the establishment of the Human Rights Council. The Special Rapporteur had provided moral and technical support to the Haitian people. Haiti was concerned with ensuring that each Haitian received protection. Haiti had the will to reform the administration and police with respect to human rights. However, in April 2008 the country was plunged into an institutional crisis as a result of the food shortage crisis. Violent demonstrations had led to the removal of the Prime Minister by 16 Senators of the Republic and since then the country had had a difficult time replacing him. The setting up of a new Government was essential for the setting up and promotion and protection of human rights. In Haiti human rights, particularly, social and cultural rights, remained a concern. Haitians currently lived on less than 2 dollars a day. There were daily challenges faced by the Haitian people in accessing drinking water, education and health services. Migrant workers could not count for the time being on any Government assistance once they had been sent back. Gangs remained a persistent problem.
On the renewal of the mandate, Haiti believed that given the political state, it was difficult for the Head of State to make such a decision without the support of a full backed Government. Before the present crisis, there had been talks on setting up a committee to prepare the national report for Haiti’s Universal Periodic Review, previewed for 2010. The delegation would be happy for the Council to give more time for Haiti to provide their answer.
Interactive Dialogue with Independent Expert on Human Rights in Haiti
MARKO HAM (Slovenia), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the Special Rapporteur had established a reputation of trust over time with successive Haitian administrations. The European Union posed questions to the Special Rapporteur. Throughout his mandate, the Special Rapporteur had insisted on the importance of fighting impunity, had any progress been made on that front? He stressed the importance of forensic experts. Had any initiatives been taken to increase their numbers in Haiti? Had the Forensic Institute received any support? Had anything been done about pre-trial detention? The Special Rapporteur was thanked for his efforts.
CHRISTINE GOY (Luxemburg) said that Haiti, as elsewhere, was a country where security and development were interlinked. Poverty and extreme poverty were present in the country. The right to food was not being respected. People were often reduced to eat mud. Representatives of non-governmental organizations had underlined that with this type of food very young children could not survive. What was the Independent Expert proposing in this regard?
JEAN-BAPTISTE MATTEI (France) said that the consolidation of the rule of law was at the heart of the current issues that remained to be solved in Haiti. Were the three laws recently passed by the Parliament aimed at reforming the judiciary, did they allow for a better functioning of the judiciary and had they reinforced its credibility? What should the priorities of the next mandate holder be? The Independent Expert was thanked for his hard work, especially with regard to the protection of all people from enforced disappearances.
JOHN VON KAUFMANN (Canada) expressed Canada’s appreciation to the Independent Expert. Canada attached great importance to the situation in Haiti. There had been notable advances, especially in terms of security and on a macroeconomic level. However the human rights situation remained a significant concern. Progress by the Haitian authorities was important to ensure continued international engagement in Haiti. Despite progress made on police reform, corruption, lack of access to justice and deplorable prison conditions were having a detrimental effect on security and stability in the country. The provision of basic social services was another key human rights concern which could only be addressed through sustained development efforts, institutional strengthening and socio-economic development. Violence against women continued to be a serious area of concern. There could not be a full and sustainable peace without the complete and unhindered involvement of women as citizens with access to full rights. Canada had given specific human rights tools to Haitian authorities. It helped with the improvement of Haitian national police through human rights training. Canada also took actions to strengthen the rule of law. Canada welcomed the work of the Independent Expert.
ALEJANDRO ARTUCIO RODRIGUEZ (Uruguay) said that it was no surprise to hear about the extraordinary work of Louis Joinet over the past six years in Haiti. Mr. Joinet had carried out a titanic task in attempting to stabilize Haiti. He and many Haitians worked together to overcome many obstacles in order to come up with a situation, which was not perfect, but was far better than the previous one. Mr. Joinet fought to deal with a number of issues that were of priority: an independent judiciary, the right to fair trial, training the police, army and armed forces in general, combating impunity, which was a system corroding the entire system in Haiti, and combating extreme poverty. Uruguay asked that the work of the Independent Expert be continued and for others to follow the path carved out by him, because they felt he took the right path. Further Uruguay thanked Mr. Joinet who had been kind enough to provide those explanations.
LOUIS JOINET, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Haiti, said the first question he would answer was on whether the mandate should continue. Of course it should. For one main reason, the promotion and protection of economic, social and cultural rights. The monitoring aspect of human rights and civil and political rights was being assured. However, he did not apply himself sufficiently to economic, social and cultural rights. The failure of reforms was distressing, specifically the reform of the land use register and the civil status register. There was good reason to be hopeful. The most advanced reform was at the magistrate school. Training of justices of the peace was underway. There was a need for a new prime minister. The Council on the Judiciary was ready to begin sitting this December. The law to grant career stability to the magistrates was almost ready. A Government needed to be appointed. Concerning prolonged detention periods, efforts were being made. There was a very good prosecutor working on it. There was a problem with suspended sentences. There was a lack of space in prisons. Many trends were underway. In combating arbitrary detention, several Experts had denounced this practice.
General Debate on Technical Assistance and Capacity Building
ANDREJ LOGAR (Slovenia), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the Council should support and promote the provision of technical assistance and capacity-building. At the same time, this assistance and cooperation should contribute towards the prevention of human rights violations and facilitate a prompt response to human rights emergencies. Another central means available to the Council was the information provided to it through the expanding network of field presences of the Office of the High Commissioner and enhanced with regional offices. This presence on the ground was also being supplemented in a useful manner through the human rights teams. The European Union welcomed that there were currently almost 50 field presences and looked forward to the Office of the High Commissioner continuing to strengthen such presences. These field presences should evolve gradually over the years and where possible the development of local capacities should gradually enable the institutions of the host country to take over. Field presences and local ownership were therefore mutually-reinforcing, and the building of credible national institutions in accordance with the Paris Principles should be seen in this context.
The European Union welcomed the prolongation of the mandate of the UNHCHR office in Colombia so as to assist the Colombian Government in implementing its recommendations fully and quickly. They also reiterated the declaration by the Presidency, on behalf of the European Union, on the situation of human rights defenders in Colombia issued on 19 May 2008. The European Union also reiterated their disappointment at the refusal by Sri Lankan authorities to accept a human rights monitoring mission in the country, in light of the deteriorating human rights situation.
AMEERAJWAD OMER LEBBE (Sri Lanka) said that the fact that technical assistance and capacity building had been identified as a separate standing agenda item of the Human Rights Council showed the importance of this area in the promotion and protection of human rights. United Nations General Assembly resolutions recognized that the promotion and protection of human rights should be based on the principles of cooperation. The Council had a clear mandate to start afresh to think on technical cooperation in order to avoid reverting to the past practices of the Commission. The new Universal Periodic Review mechanism could be a new effective way of strengthening the capacity of Member States, upon request. The Council needed to further discuss ways and means with regard to the provision of technical assistance in order to assist States in their efforts to fulfil their human rights obligations. Such technical cooperation should not be imposed but should be demand-driven.
DANIEL KUHN, of United Nations Watch, said central to the Human Rights Council mandate was the promotion of human rights through international dialogue and cooperation as provided in General Assembly resolution 60/251. How could the Human Rights Council best assist countries and individuals most in need? The most important vehicle for identifying such needs and for providing advisory services, technical assistance and capacity-building were the country mandates. Under this agenda item, Council sessions benefited from interactive dialogues with a number of mandate-holders. United Nations Watch deeply regretted that the country mandate for the Democratic Republic of the Congo had not been renewed. On the subject of mandates, Special Rapporteurs had over 250 outstanding requests for visits. United Nations Watch called on all States to cooperate with the valuable Special Procedures of the Council. United Nations Watch also acknowledged the work of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in providing technical assistance to developing countries. The Council’s advice on technical assistance and capacity-building contributed to that goal, allowing Governments to address their respective human rights challenges.
Right of Reply
ASADOLLAH ESHRAGH JAHROMI (Iran), speaking in a right of reply, said that he wished to address the allegations made by United Nations Watch this morning with regards to the Durban Review process, for the sake of clarity. Iran fully supported active participation of civil society, particularly, non-governmental organizations, in the Durban Review Conference and process. They had already established within the framework for the Conference certain rules and regulations to accredit non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the process. The said NGO which was mentioned in the statement by UN Watch was, as a matter of fact, a corporation without consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council. Member States had the legitimate right to submit comments on participation by non-governmental organizations. A number of resolutions granted this right, including resolution 1996/31 ECOSOC. Iran raised clear questions to be answered by the NGO, which failed to answer them and decided to withdraw their application for accreditation. It was regrettable that United Nations Watch while misinforming the Council tried to resort to blame-game and distortion of realities on the ground.
For use of the information media; not an official record
HRC08078E