HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL STARTS INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE WITH INDEPENDENT EXPERTS ON SAFE DRINKING WATER AND SANITATION AND ON EXTREME POVERTY

The Human Rights Council this afternoon started its clustered interactive dialogue with the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation and the Independent Expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty. It also concluded its clustered interactive dialogue with the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity and the Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights.

Catarina de Albuquerque, Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, began the presentation of her report by saying that on 28 July 2010, the General Assembly had recognized that water and sanitation were a human right. Her thematic report focused on the human rights obligations and responsibilities that applied in cases where non-State service providers were involved in water and sanitation service delivery. The Independent Expert also provided further information on her mission to Egypt, her joint mission to Bangladesh with the Independent Expert on Extreme Poverty, as well as brief observations on her mission to Slovenia.

Maria Magdalena Sepulveda Carmona, the Independent Expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty, presented the joint report on mission to Bangladesh with the Independent Expert on safe drinking water and sanitation, and the report outlining progress on the Draft Guiding Principles on Human Rights and Extreme Poverty. The report on the Draft Guiding Principles on Human Rights and Extreme Poverty outlined the main challenges experienced by persons living in extreme poverty in realizing their rights and presented an annotated outline of how to improve the existing draft guiding principles.

Speaking as concerned countries were Egypt and Bangladesh.

In the interactive debate on safe drinking water and sanitation, speakers welcomed the General Assembly resolution that recognised the right to water as a human right. The focus of the report on non-State actors helped in better understanding the human rights obligations of the State and the role of non-state actors in the field of water and sanitation service provision. While many agreed that non-state service providers could play an important role in alleviating the global water and sanitation crisis, their role was questioned on many accounts, ranging from quality to affordability, and many chose to focus on water services to the detriment of the sanitation side of services. The international community should redouble efforts to provide technical assistance and technology transfer to developing countries to enhance their capacity to deliver safe drinking water and sanitation for all.

Concerning the question of human rights and extreme poverty, speakers commended the report of the Independent Expert on extreme poverty, but said that an elaboration of guidelines alone would not improve the situation of those living in extreme poverty. There was a relationship between extreme poverty and the non-realization of the right to development, and this issue should be included in the Independent Expert's future considerations. Extreme poverty should not be understood on purely monetary terms but also in terms of development. Elimination of extreme poverty required a strong political will and a multi-pronged and multi-dimensional approach at all levels and practical and workable solutions must be found to generate enough resources to bring relief to those in need.

Speaking in the interactive dialogue on safe drinking water and sanitation and on extreme poverty were Germany, Nigeria on behalf of the African Group, France, Ecuador, Syria on behalf of the Arab Group, Austria, Republic of Moldova, Iceland, European Union, Uruguay, Spain, Nepal, Pakistan on behalf of Organization of the Islamic Conference, United Kingdom, Colombia, Indonesia, Switzerland, Hungary, China, Chile, Paraguay, United States and Brazil.

Speaking in a right of reply was Paraguay.

Rudi Muhamad Rizki, Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity, made closing remarks at the end of the interactive dialogue on human rights and international solidarity and on toxic products and wastes which started this morning by reiterating his call to States and all relevant organizations to internalize the principle of international solidarity because that was what was needed to address the global challenges.

Calin Georgescu, Special Rapporteur on the adverse effects of the movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights, in his concluding remarks, stressed the importance of international cooperation, and this was a main issue in developing future guidelines. Regarding voluntary measures to address the negative impact of ship-breaking, prior informed consent was an example of good practice.

In the context of the clustered interactive dialogue on international solidarity and toxic waste, many speakers agreed on the fundamental value of solidarity in international relations and its significant role in achieving internationally agreed objectives in the field of human rights and development. On toxic waste, a speaker said that a human rights-based approach allowed for a comprehensive perspective on the problem, which allowed the Council to cover goods that did not have environmental links.

Speaking on human rights and international solidarity and on toxic and dangerous waste were Burkina Faso, Senegal, Chile and Peru. The following national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations took the floor: Associazione Communità Papa Giovanni XXIII, the Federation of Associations for the Defence and the Promotion of Human Rights, Permanent Assembly of Human Rights, Planetary Association for Clean Energy, Human Rights Advocates, North-South XXI, and the Indian Council of South America.

The next meeting of the Council will be start at 9 a.m. on Thursday, 16 September, when the Council will conclude its clustered interactive dialogue on safe drinking water and sanitation and extreme poverty. It will then listen to an update by the Chairperson of the Open-ended Working Group on an Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child; a statement which will be read out on behalf of the Chairperson of the Working Group on the right to development; as well as the introduction of thematic reports of the Secretary-General, High Commissioner, and Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Council will hold three back-to-back meetings tomorrow from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. At 12:50 p.m., the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Prof. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, will address the Council.

Interactive Dialogue on Human Rights and International Solidarity and on Dumping of Toxic Products and Wastes

SABINE BAKYONO KANZIE (Burkina Faso) said the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity had reproduced in his report the views expressed by States in the questionnaire on human rights and international solidarity, and the mainly shared vision as to the fundamental value of solidarity in international relations and its significant role in achieving internationally agreed objectives in the field of human rights and development was appreciated. The world was increasingly more linked, and countries of the north and south and developing countries depended on a concentrated search for solutions to the problems facing mankind. There should be human and worldwide solidarity based on strengthening cooperation among all stakeholders. Examples of good practices in the area of solidarity at the national and international levels already existed, but concerned parties could benefit further from an exchange of experiences. There was still a lack of effective implementation of the principle of solidarity, despite progress, and therefore the Independent Expert should continue to work to elaborate a framework to ensure international solidarity for the benefit of all.

MARIAME SY (Senegal) said that countries and peoples had never been as interdependent as they were today. While this should have brought countries together, it had only exacerbated divisions. In this regard, the full enjoyment of human rights was blocked for many individuals around the world, including the right to food, decent housing, education, health and the right to work. Senegal supported the proposal to establish international mechanisms to ensure that States kept their promises. In addition, it would be useful to reassess international cooperation with a greater emphasis on the need for international solidarity. To this end, examples of good practices could be very useful and Senegal asked the Independent Expert whether there had been an evaluation of good practices in international solidarity that could be detailed in the report and shared with members of the Council.

JUAN PEDRO SEPULVEDA CASTRO (Chile) thanked the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity for his report and said that international solidarity was not limited only to international cooperation. It was linked to basic concepts such as justice and inclusion. Solidarity was only one aspect of international cooperation and complying with standards helped the international community to meet the global challenges, such as in the case of Haiti, which was a clear evidence of how international solidarity helped in reconstructing a country. It was unthinkable that international solidarity as a moral principle should not involve all segments of society, such as civil society.

CARLOS SIBILLE (Peru) said with regard to the report of the Special Rapporteur on toxic wastes, this contained valuable work which faced the international community with a reality that was having a serious effect on the basic human rights of thousands of people. The whole subject of toxic waste had traditionally been taken up from the approach of public health or the environment, but this was insufficient to establish mechanisms and procedures for dealing with this complex issue. A human rights-based approach allowed for a comprehensive perspective on the problem, and was much more useful to regulate the use of mercury, which was linked to a whole series of problems outside the health and environmental aspect. The human rights-based approach allowed the Council to cover goods that did not have environmental links, but did have a significant impact on people, such as second-hand automobiles, and the Special Rapporteur should explain whether he considered it relevant to include such an issue in future reports.

STEFANO NOBILE, of Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, in a joint statement with Dominicans for Justice and Peace (Order of Preachers), Caritas Internationalis (International Confederation of Catholic Charities), and New Humanity, said that the report on international solidarity offered valuable insights on the definition, interpretation and implications of international solidarity, as well as on relevant existing international law in this domain. The non-governmental organizations preferred the term “international solidarity” to “global solidarity” as it better expressed the concept of extraterritorial obligations of Member States without excluding the responsibilities and engagement of other relevant stakeholders.

DAVID FERNANDEZ PUYANA, of Federación de Asociaciones de Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos, noted that in his report, the Independent Expert on international solidarity had identified that the right to peace was an integral part of achieving international solidarity. The Federation asked the Independent Expert to take into account the idea of the right to peace and international solidarity as inherently linked to the right of peoples to self-determination. Lastly, special attention should be given to the valuable contributions made by civil society organizations.

JULIA FRANCO, of Permanent Assembly for Human Rights, called upon the Council to look at the situation of indiscriminate use of agro-toxic products on soy plantations in Paraguay. The impact on the health of people included cancers, nervous system disorders, fetal malformations and other illnesses. The recent law aggravated the situation as there was no longer the need to give advance notice of spraying. The Permanent Assembly for Human Rights urged the Council to look into this criminal situation.

VITA DE WAAL, of Planetary Association for Clean Energy, in a joint statement, called on governments to establish international regulations related to geo-engineering, which were also lacking in many national legislations. This technology affected and modified the weather and was used to effect a change in the global climate. The use of geo-engineering on weather patterns had global repercussions while there were obvious trans-boundary and public health consequences related to chemicals sprayed into the atmosphere. New regulatory frameworks needed to be put in place to protect the public and ecosystem from the adverse effects of geo-engineering.

AMOL MEHRA, of Human Rights Advocates, said because of the often central role of corporations in the movement and dumping of toxic wastes, any resolution on this topic should include strong language urging corporate accountability. The concept of the right to truth was a useful tool for victim redress and as a mechanism toward ensuring corporate accountability. The right to truth had been expanding beyond its traditional use in investigating mass disappearances and repression as a means of combating impunity in all cases of human rights violations. However, exposure of liable actors through the right to truth was not enough; it was only the first step in facilitating a victim's right to remedy and reparation. Corporate and other private actors could be brought into the discussion pertaining to the movement and dumping of toxic wastes, and Member States should re-examine the mandate to include a consideration of the intersection of corporate activity and the movement and dumping of toxic wastes.

ALEXANDRA RIVEA, of North-South XXI, said international solidarity was part of international law, and international solidarity and cooperation were necessary in achieving the realization of human rights everywhere in the world. Certain solidarity rights were of imminent importance to combat the threats to the full enjoyment of human rights: climate change, and the international financial and economic crisis and food crises. The report of the Independent Expert did not appear to appropriately consider the outcome of the Climate Change Conference held in Copenhagen last December, and he should thoroughly address this point in future reports. He should also provide strong leadership in guiding the international community towards greater solidarity and cooperation, and should therefore prioritise the development of a draft declaration on international solidarity in cooperation with the Human Rights Council's Advisory Committee.

RONALD BARNES, of Indian Council of South America, said that Bristol Bay was located in the Southwest region of Alaska and was known for its rich geography with wild rivers, lakes, streams and the world’s largest sockeye salmon run with a fishery that netted more than 440 million a year. Mining companies had caused irreparable harm to the natural environment in Alaska and the toxic waste for mining was deadly for such a huge ecosystem. The Indian Council of South America invited the Special Rapporteur to come to Alaska to address the reckless behavior caused by the United States Government in its treatment of indigenous peoples in the region in favour of international mining companies.

Concluding Remarks

RUDI MUHAMMAD RIZKI, the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity, in his concluding remarks, thanked all speakers for their comments and suggestions and the support expressed for the mandate. The Independent Expert reiterated his call to States and all relevant organizations to internalize the principle of international solidarity because that was what was needed to address the global challenges.

Calin Georgescu, Special Rapporteur on the Adverse Effects of the Movement and Dumping of Toxic and Dangerous Products and Wastes on the Enjoyment of Human Rights, in concluding remarks, said he was completely aware of the support to expand the mandate to cover the overall management of hazardous wastes, and appreciated this. He was also completely aware of the need for and the concern to have as soon as possible a process of development of guidelines of human rights obligations in this context. He was deeply convinced of the need for deep consultation with experts in the nearest future, as well as with non-governmental organizations, and stressed the role of the latter for the future topic of guidelines. He also stressed the importance of international cooperation, and this was a main issue in developing future guidelines. Regarding voluntary measures to address the negative impact of ship-breaking, prior informed consent was an example of good practice. The mandate which existed right now had a significant importance. A clear dialogue had to be developed. International solidarity also had to be developed in an attempt to reduce the impact as soon as possible. Nature did not produce waste, the only thing that produced waste on this planet was a human being. The role was to understand this principle as soon as possible, after which the concrete effects in the field could be understood.


Documents

The Report of the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, Catarina de Albuquerque, (A/HRC/15/31), focuses on the human rights obligations and responsibilities which apply in cases of non-State service provision of water and sanitation, with an overview of the role that non-State service providers play in delivering water and sanitation throughout the world. The report also outlines the human rights obligations of States and the responsibilities of non-State service providers and highlights three main areas where challenges can be faced in this regard: decision-making, operation of services, and accountability and enforcement. In the present report, the independent expert emphasizes that the human rights framework does not express a preference over models of service provision, but insists that in all instances, the human rights to water and sanitation be guaranteed. The final section of the report contains conclusions and recommendations.

The Progress Report on the Compilation of Good Practices, (A/HRC/15/31/Add.1), presents a framework for assessing good practices from a human rights perspective, using five normative criteria (availability, quality/safety, acceptability, accessibility and affordability) and five cross-cutting criteria (non-discrimination, participation, accountability, impact and sustainability).

Preliminary Note on the Mission to Slovenia (24 to 28 May 2010) (A/HRC/15/31/Add.2) details a trip made to Slovenia by the independent expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation to assess the way in which the State is implementing its human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation. In the present report, the independent expert notes that, although overall the country enjoys very high levels of access to water and sanitation, certain members of the population do not enjoy equal levels of access or otherwise face challenges.

Mission to Egypt (21 to 28 June 2009), (A/HRC/15/31/Add.3), summarizes the observations of the Independent Expert of her trip to Egypt. The report notes, in particular, challenges related to water availability; water quality; sanitation; affordability; access to information, participation and transparency; and regulation of the water and wastewater sectors. She points out that these challenges are observed in particular in informal settlements and in rural areas. These are the areas where the poorest people live, and their access to information is hampered by lack of awareness, illiteracy, lack of communications, and lack of transparency on the part of the authorities. The independent expert ends the report with conclusions and recommendations.

Corrigendum (A/HRC/15/31/Add.3.Corr.1) corrects paragraph 15 third sentence for €1.3 million read €130 million.

The Joint Report of the Independent Expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty and the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, Mission to Bangladesh, (A/HRC/15/55), summarizes the findings of a trip made to Bangladesh from 3 to 10 December. In the report, the independent expert on water and sanitation highlights the problems relating to sanitation, water quality and availability, and menstrual hygiene. The independent expert on extreme poverty focuses on social protection programmes for education, women, older persons, emergency relief and decent work, and points out the challenges to the effective implementation of these programmes.

The Progress Report on the Independent Expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty on how to improve the draft guiding principles on extreme poverty and human rights, Maria Magdalena Sepulveda, (A/HRC/15/41), contains detailed recommendations by the independent expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty on how to improve the draft guiding principles on extreme poverty and human rights prepared by the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. The report outlines the main challenges experienced by persons living in extreme poverty that must be taken into account when preparing the principles and it presents an annotated outline of the independent expert’s proposal on how to improve the draft guiding principles, divided into three sections: overarching human rights principles, overarching policy guidelines and specific rights-based obligations.

Presentation of Reports on Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation and on Human Rights and Extreme Poverty

CATARINA DE ALBUQUERQUE, Independent Expert on the Issue of Human Rights Obligations Related to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation, began the presentation of her report by saying that on 28 July 2010, the General Assembly recognized that water and sanitation were a human right. As she had said in the past, the right to water and sanitation was indispensable for the realization of other human rights. Today, almost a billion people still did not have access to an improved water source and 2.6 billion did not have access to improved sanitation. During the last twelve months, the Independent Expert had begun to collect good practices. Her thematic report to the Council focused on the human rights obligations and responsibilities that applied in cases where non-State service providers were involved in water and sanitation service delivery. While non-State service providers could positively contribute to the realization of the right to water and sanitation, there had been situations where human rights were disregarded. Non-State service providers had specific human rights responsibilities and had to exercise due diligence to become aware of or address the potential or actual negative impacts caused by their activities. Besides complying with national laws and regulations, non-State service providers needed to take proactive steps to ensure that they did not violate international human rights standards.

The Independent Expert also provided further information on her mission to Egypt, her joint mission to Bangladesh with the Independent Expert on extreme poverty, as well as brief observations on her mission to Slovenia. Having travelled to Egypt in June 2009, she was impressed with the vision and political will demonstrated by Egypt in working towards universal access to safe drinking water and sanitation. Nevertheless, Egypt still faced important challenges. Pollutants were still being introduced into the water supply, posing risks to public health. In addition, more had to be done in Egypt to find a sustainable solution for protecting the right of slum dwellers to an adequate standard of living as well as their right to water and sanitation. Regarding her trip to Bangladesh, the Independent Expert said that the lack of access to safe water and sanitation was most acute for those living in extreme poverty and their opportunities to escape poverty would always be limited as long as they had limited or no access to sanitation and water. Bangladesh had made some progress with regard to sanitation, in particular by pioneering the Community Led Total Sanitation approach. However, she remained deeply concerned by the overall lack of wastewater treatment in Bangladesh that threatened water quality and the environment. Finally, reporting on her mission to Slovenia, the Independent Expert noted that while Slovenia had ensured the right to water and sanitation for the majority of its population, rising poverty rates could very well lead to unaffordable water and sanitation services for people living in extreme poverty. Ms. Albuquerque concluded by saying that she remained concerned about the situation of certain Roma communities in Slovenia who did not have equal access to safe water and sanitation.

MARIA MAGDALENA SEPULVEDA CARMONA, Independent Expert on the Question of Human Rights and Extreme Poverty, presented two reports, one on the joint mission with the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation in Bangladesh, and the other on the progress on the Draft Guiding Principles on Human Rights and Extreme Poverty.

Bangladesh was recognised for its pioneer efforts in both increasing access to water and sanitation and improving the situation of those living in extreme poverty. Significant challenges remained throughout the country and people in both rural and urban areas struggled for daily survival, particularly women and poor people affected by challenges posed by climate change. Notwithstanding several well-known programmes for women such as cash and assets transfers, or micro credit programmes, the Government must remove legislative, procedural and cultural barriers impeding women from accessing economic and other resources, to enable them to escape poverty. Climate change severely undermined access to safe water and sanitation and the Independent Expert called on the international community to provide Bangladesh with the necessary support for adaptation and mitigation measures. The Independent Expert commended the Government for establishing a large number of social protection programmes, but greater efforts were needed to ensure the coverage of the informal sector, where 80 per cent of the workforce was employed, and those living in extreme poverty.

The progress report on the Draft Guiding Principles on Human Rights and Extreme Poverty outlined the main challenges experienced by persons living in extreme poverty in realizing their rights and presented an annotated outline of how to improve the existing draft guiding principles. While the number of people living in extreme poverty was increasing and inequalities between the rich and poor were growing, States and the international community were largely ineffective in reaching those living in extreme poverty. The Guiding Principles could be an important tool in breaking the cycle of extreme poverty, and the new annotated outline offered a coherent and accessible action tool for a variety of different actors working on issues related to human rights and extreme poverty. The outline focused on States as the primary responsible actor, without omitting the responsibility of non-state actors, and the impact that international stakeholders, international assistance and cooperation could play in eradicating extreme poverty in developing countries. The recent global food, fuel, economic and financial crises and their disproportionate impact on persons living in extreme poverty further demonstrated the need for Guiding Principles, Ms. Sepulveda Carmona said. With the Draft, the Council would have the opportunity to gather in one document provisions relevant to the promotion and protection of human rights of persons living in extreme poverty. Also, the Guidelines would strengthen the implementation of human rights instruments by guiding decisions in all areas of policy-making that impacted the lives of people living in extreme poverty.

Statements from Concerned Countries

MAHMOUD AFIFI, (Egypt), speaking as a concerned country, said Egypt paid particular attention to the issue of access to safe drinking water and sanitation as well as the protection of human rights in this context, and welcomed the visit of the Independent Expert to Egypt as a demonstration of Egypt's commitment to cooperate with the Independent Expert in the discharge of her mandate. The report was an important contribution to the ongoing dialogue concerning water and sanitation in Egypt, and reflected the positive developments that the water sector had witnessed in recent years. The Independent Expert also highlighted important challenges faced in the area of drinking water and sanitation, the great majority of which were being addressed through various measures. While Egypt believed that the Independent Expert did an admirable job of getting up to speed with the relevant achievements and challenges, it reminded that calling upon a limited range of documents and a limited set of interviews could sometimes hinder the ability to draw comprehensive and accurate pictures of the various facets of the situation. Concerning the Water Law, the Government was doing its utmost to promote the adoption of the new water law, and discussions were still ongoing on some of the draft's provisions. Egypt agreed with and accepted many of the findings and recommendations contained in the report.

NAHIDA SOBHAN (Bangladesh), speaking as a concerned country, said that Bangladesh had undergone national elections at the end of 2008, through which a new democratically elected government assumed office. The new Government was pursuing the rule of law and democracy despite facing daunting challenges, which included poverty and the non-availability of resources. The delegation had a few specific comments on the report. Firstly, on Paragraph 35, it should be mentioned that the Government had a National Sanitation Strategy setting forth the target of 100 percent access to improved sanitation by 2013. In response to the Independent Expert on extreme poverty’s report, Bangladesh pointed out that it had made important strides in women’s rights and the representation of women in parliament were much higher than in many other countries. Finally, while Bangladesh faced multidimensional challenges in fulfilling its commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights, it had adopted a holistic and multi-pronged approach aimed at alleviating poverty on the one hand and ensuring the human rights of its citizens on the other.

Interactive Dialogue on Access to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation and on Human Rights and Extreme Poverty

MARKUS LONING (Germany) said that the focus on non-State actors in the report of the Independent Expert on safe drinking water and sanitation helped in better understanding the human rights obligations of the State and the role of non-state actors in the field of water and sanitation service provision. Safe drinking water and sanitation were necessary and essential for survival, as the floods in Pakistan had demonstrated. That was why Germany, together with Spain, had promoted the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation for some time. Germany believed that non-state service providers could play an important role in alleviating the global water and sanitation crisis and Germany therefore supported the inclusive approach of the Independent Expert that left it to the States to engage non-state actors in this important task. At the same time, Germany appreciated that the Independent Expert made it clear that the States remained the primary duty-bearer and had to ensure that access to safe drinking water and sanitation was guaranteed within their jurisdiction. Germany asked if a State could transfer its human rights obligations to non-state actors and how the General Assembly resolution “The Human Right to Water and Sanitation” affected the Geneva process and the work of the Independent Expert.

MOHAMMED HAIDARA (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said the African Group recognized the increasing involvement of non-State providers, and they wished to stress that it was the responsibility of States to ensure the delivery of safe drinking water and sanitation to all individuals. The African Group was particularly concerned about the vulnerability of millions to diseases; access to safe drinking water was a major step for relieving suffering, and States and non-governmental organizations should redouble their efforts to provide technical assistance and technology transfer to developing countries to enhance their capacity to deliver safe drinking water and sanitation for all. The recommendations made by the Independent Expert were welcome, as it was through these that access to safe drinking water and sanitation could be ensured for all. The African Group also commended the report of the Independent Expert on extreme poverty, and fully endorsed her conclusions, while failing to be convinced that an elaboration of guidelines alone would improve the situation of those living in extreme poverty. There was a relationship between extreme poverty and the non-realization of the right to development, and this issue should be included in the Independent Expert's future considerations.

JEAN-BAPTISTE MATTEI (France) said that extreme poverty should not be understood on purely monetary terms but also in terms of development. The report of the Independent Expert on extreme poverty would help in preparing the final version of guiding principles. France and other members would present a resolution at this session of the Council aiming to provide the Independent Expert with the task of preparing the final version of these guiding principles, with the support of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Also, in the report, the Independent Expert highlighted the need to respect and protect the autonomy of people living in extreme poverty. What measures could be taken, particularly at the local level, to involve these people in the political, social and cultural lives of the countries in which they lived?

FERNANDA CARRILLO (Ecuador) said Ecuador welcomed the General Assembly resolution that recognised the right to water as a human right and said that everyone must have access to water, regardless of their economic status. The recognition of this right posed an obligation on each State to guarantee its implementation and application. Ecuador was one of the pioneers in treating water as a human right. Under the Constitution, water was regarded as a public resource and the privatisation of water was prohibited. The State had an important supervisory function to ensure sufficient supply, but water use was the responsibility of communities themselves. Ecuador called on all international institutions to step up assistance in providing drinking water to all human beings, particularly to children so that no child would die for lack of water or sanitation. Concerning the report presented by the Independent Expert on extreme poverty, Ecuador pointed out the commitment of the Government to reduce poverty and to remedy the unacceptable inequalities. Some of the programmes set up by the Government were social protection programmes and Human Development Vouchers available to elderly and children and other vulnerable groups. Vouchers covered 65 per cent of people living in poverty. Despite the serious global crises, the Government maintained the budgetary allocation for the social sector as it believed that crises could not be a pretext for increasing the vulnerability of the poor.

RANIA RIFAI (Syria), speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, said with regard to the report on safe drinking water and sanitation, it was an excellent report which stressed the obligations and responsibilities in the context of human rights for non-State actors providing such services. Water was essential to ensure sustainable development, and was essential for health and prosperity. This was stated in the preamble of resolution 58/217, adopted by the General Assembly in 2004. This statement sought to reduce the number of persons without access to safe drinking water. Paragraph thirteen of the report stated that the cost of water supplied by private vendors was ten to twenty times the cost of water provided by public utilities, due to the high transport costs and absence of regulations. Water remained a major challenge, as countries depended on public utilities for water. The report was based on the premise of the availability of water and its safety, but many countries, especially in the Arab Group, were water-deficient, now and in the future. This problem was compounded by the Israeli Occupation Authority's theft of water.

GEROLD VOLLMER (Austria) said that the access to safe drinking water and sanitation was an important issue for Austria. Today almost a billion people suffered from the lack of access to water and 2.6 billion people were without access to improved sanitation facilities. A global response and cooperation from all stakeholders was needed to significantly reduce this number. Austria asked the Independent Expert to elaborate on how non-State actors could be encouraged to engage more with States on the issue of water and sanitation. Moreover, Austria was curious to know how the Independent Expert aimed to further improve cooperation and communication with the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, as their work was closely connected.

TATIANA LAPICUS (Republic of Moldova) said that the Government of the Republic of Moldova was aware of the crucial importance of the quality of drinking water for the health of the people and strove to protect the safety of the water and increase safe access. The Republic of Moldova commended the focus of the report on the participation of non-state actors in the provision of water and sanitation services. The Government was grateful to its development partners for their support. At the end of 2005, the Government approved the water and sanitation by 2015 programme and recently adjusted the laws in line with human rights standards. Regarding the report presented by the Independent Expert on extreme poverty, the Republic of Moldova was grateful to see the result of the long process initiated in 2006 and said that the recommendations were pertinent especially from the perspective of the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals and fighting the impacts of the economic crisis. The Republic of Moldova concluded by saying that extreme poverty represented not only a national but an international challenge which could only be addressed by joint efforts of the international community.

VETURLIDI THOR STEFANSSON (Iceland) said next week world leaders would gather in New York to review the progress made on the Millennium Development Goals. The Millennium Declaration specifically set out the goal to halve, by 2015, the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation, and this should be kept in mind. Another Millennium Development Goal was to halve by 2015 the proportion of the world population living in poverty. The sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation was an integral part of the realization of all human rights and consequently the full enjoyment of life would be impossible to reach without fully securing access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation for all. The right to water was the right of everyone to sufficient, safe, acceptable, accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic uses, and the right to water was also part of the right to an adequate standard of living. The right was also implicit in a number of international human rights treaties. It was imperative that the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation be recognised as a human right that was essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights.

NICOLE RECKINGER (European Union) said that safe drinking water and sanitation were crucial for a life of health and dignity. It was therefore of great concern that millions of people worldwide still did not have access to safe drinking water and sanitation. In order to reduce this number and to guarantee access to safe drinking water and sanitation, States were free to delegate water provision to non-State service providers. However, the State could not exempt itself from its human rights obligations by involving non-State actors in service provision. In this regard, States remained the primary duty-bearer for the realization of human rights at all times. On the issue of extreme poverty, the European Union congratulated the Independent Expert for her progress report, which was based on the outcome of numerous and productive consultations. The European Union was at the vanguard of extreme poverty alleviation and continued to be the first supplier of overseas development assistance. In a question posed to the Independent Expert, the representative of the European Union asked to what extent did she think that the guidelines could be useful in achieving, or at least working towards, the Millennium Development Goals.

LAURA DUPUY LASSERRE (Uruguay) said that the Independent Expert on the right to safe drinking water and sanitation made a specific reference to article 47 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uruguay in her report. Uruguay had a long tradition of providing water services through state companies, but it also had some experience in providing the services through non-State actors. Unfortunately, this experience had not been positive, both in terms of prices and quality of water. The society mobilised itself and submitted an amendment to the Constitution in which it regarded water as a human right and requested the State to provide the service. The provision of drinking water and sanitation service should be ensured without prejudice and without any regard to social or economic order. Uruguay continued to make progress in coverage with safe drinking water and had almost eliminated the outbreaks of water born diseases. Today, 98 per cent of the population had access to safe drinking water, while national sanitation coverage was 49 per cent of households. Uruguay reaffirmed its appreciation of the Independent Expert and hoped the date for her upcoming visit to the country could be fixed soon.

PABLO GOMEZ DE OLEA BUSTINZA (Spain) said Spain was a co-sponsor of the mandate of the Independent Expert on safe drinking water and sanitation, and Spain thought she had carried out her mandate very appropriately and had lived up satisfactorily to each of the tasks listed in the different resolutions adopted by the Human Rights Council. Today, Spain welcomed the second thematic report aiming to clarify the different duties and responsibilities of non-State actors who provided safe drinking water and sanitation. It was the duty of the State to ensure this provision, and to decide upon delegation to non-State actors, which did not in any way prevent the implementation of the State's duties. Human rights concerning access to safe drinking water and sanitation were progressive rights, included in economic, social and cultural rights. Spain welcomed the recommendations contained in the report, including the measures that must be taken by States to implement these rights through all appropriate methods. The delegations of Spain and Germany were presenting a joint resolution that they hoped would be adopted through consensus.

BHRIGU DHUNGANA (Nepal) noted Dr. Carmona’s assessment of the cyclical nature between extreme poverty and human rights violations. Studies had revealed that poverty fuelled political and social unrest, more often than not leading to conflict, violence and civil wars. Figures in this regard were alarming. Eighteen of the 49 least developed countries, the poorest and most vulnerable members of the United Nations, were enduring armed conflict or had just come out of it. Ninety percent of those killed in these conflicts had been civilians. Lives in the desperate corners of the globe had been further aggravated by crises of unprecedented nature and intensity that the world had experienced recently, mainly due to food shortages, unemployment and climate change. Nepal firmly believed that poverty was a vicious cycle and that development should be a shared responsibility. In this regard, the aspirations of the developing and least developed parts of the world could not be materialized without international solidarity and support.

MUHAMMAD SAEED SARWAR (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, said that the role of non-state actors was becoming increasingly prominent in supporting governments in providing water and sanitation services to the population. However, their role was questioned on many accounts, ranging from quality to affordability, and many chose to focus on water services to the detriment of the sanitation side of services. Delegating the provision of those services did not exempt the State from responsibility and providing these services had to be done using the appropriate regulatory framework to ensure affordability, accessibility and quality. The Organization of the Islamic Conference supported the recommendations made by the Independent Expert with regard to institutionalizing the process of delegating the services to non-state actors. The Organization of the Islamic Conference took note of the recommendations made by the Independent Expert on extreme poverty for improving the guiding principles on extreme poverty and human rights, but said that just formulating the guidelines was not enough. The elimination of extreme poverty required a strong political will and a multi-pronged and multi-dimensional approach at all levels and practical and workable solutions must be found to generate enough resources to bring relief to those in need. The Organization of the Islamic Conference regretted that the Independent Expert did not make a reference to the need to operationalize the right to development while making recommendations to improve the draft guiding principles.

JENNIFER MACNAUGHTAN (United Kingdom) said the United Kingdom was firmly committed to addressing the impact that inadequate water and poor sanitation had on the full enjoyment of human rights, and recognized a right to water as an element of the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living, although not as a stand-alone human right. The United Kingdom also believed that inadequate sanitation had a negative impact on the protection of human rights. But the United Kingdom did not believe that there existed, at present, a sufficient legal basis under international law to declare sanitation as a human right. The right to sanitation had not been agreed upon in any United Nations human rights treaty, nor was there evidence that it existed in customary international law, and therefore the United Kingdom questioned the inclusion in the Independent Expert's report of references to "the right to sanitation". The United Kingdom would be grateful for any further information the Independent Expert could provide about the future direction of work in light of her stated intention to continue to work on service provision as it affected human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation.

ALICIA VICTORIA ARANGO OLMOS (Colombia) said that access to safe water and sanitation was a top priority for Colombia. Access to drinking water was a basic human right, directly linked to the right to health and human dignity. Referring to the report on extreme poverty, Colombia supported the efforts of the Independent Expert in preparing a set of guidelines that could help States to combat extreme poverty. In Colombia, the National Development Plan had helped to reduce extreme poverty from 19.7 per cent to 16 per cent in the period between 2002 and 2009. Furthermore, the Government had proposed an agreement to entrepreneurial circles to help contribute to the alleviation of extreme poverty in Colombia.

Mr. A.E. ARBY (Indonesia) welcomed the two reports presented today and found that it was useful that those two issues were addressed jointly. Both highlighted the right to water and sanitation as a basic human right and therefore the ratification of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights should be a priority for governments. Any decision taken by a State to delegate service provisions to non-state actors must be taken in a democratic and participatory process. Indonesia took note of the status of women and girls in certain parts of the world and said that difficulties they had in accessing safe drinking water often were the result of extreme poverty. Particular attention should be given to respecting the rights of women and girls while elaborating or upgrading water-related legislation, which should be strictly non-discriminatory. Indonesia asked what simple remedial steps at the level of individual household would help governments to relieve water-related problems in the most affected countries or regions.

BARBARA FONTANA (Switzerland) said Switzerland welcomed the Independent Experts for their initiative to produce a joint report on their mission to Bangladesh, and encouraged synergy between mandate holders and the drafting of joint documents. With regard to the report on safe drinking water and sanitation, the Independent Expert recommended that the State and active water providers carried out human rights impact studies, and Switzerland asked what human rights outside the right to water and sanitation could serve as a framework for this study. The Independent Expert also noted that precarious habitation zones often were not served by collective water provision, and Switzerland asked whether granting property titles to the inhabitants of these zones could be a solution to remedy this. Switzerland then asked the Independent Expert on extreme poverty whether, in the light of the Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor's suggestion that the right to enterprise be reinforced in order to fight against poverty through allowing every person the possibility to create and manage a company, would such a system ensure access to saving, credit, insurance, and pensions, and ensure the economic development of all.

AGNES FARGO (Hungary) said that Hungary gave special attention to the very important subject of the right to water. Given the importance of this particular topic, the Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs was organizing, within the framework of the Third Budapest Human Rights Forum, a panel discussion in October on the subject of access to water as a source of conflict. Turning to human rights and extreme poverty, Hungary praised the Independent Expert for the multifaceted approach she used to formulate her recommendations on this very complex phenomenon. Providing good education to children and teaching them skills would give individuals the opportunity to integrate into labour markets and society, which was fundamental to avoiding social exclusion and extreme poverty. Finally, Hungary added that it was important to educate adults about their rights and obligations, which could also be a way to reduce the number of people living in extreme poverty.

ZHANG CHAO (China) said China took note on the two reports presented today. Water and sanitation were the lifeline of human beings and development. China was in favour of the enjoyment of water and sanitation and pointed out that countries should have national plans and laws to extend coverage to underserved areas. In providing service there should be no discrimination against groups of individuals, and States should have a supervisory role over service providers. In China the Government paid lots of attention to the water problem and intended to resolve the problem of drinking water in rural areas by 2013. China thanked the Independent Expert on extreme poverty for her draft guidelines, and reducing poverty and achieving development had always been a Government priority. The number of poor in the rural areas had been reduced by millions. China also provided assistance to developing countries in their poverty reduction programme. Poverty was a major problem, China said, for the full enjoyment of human rights. It was crucial to increase official development assistance to 0.7 per cent of gross national income by 2015.

PEDRO OYARCE (Chile) said with regard to human rights and extreme poverty, improving the draft principles on extreme poverty and human rights by adding practical operational proposals would help to respond to problems of poverty and social exclusion, which were an attack on human dignity and had global dimensions. It was important to develop social programmes and poverty reduction plans and have international action in this context. A high-quality democracy required real resolute action to eliminate inequalities and extreme poverty. These principles must be made operational - the responsibility of States to protect the rights of individuals living in extreme poverty must be promoted, and they should focus on practical measures ensuring that institutions in charge of social programmes and plans had specific guidance, including from a view point of human rights. The present session should approve a draft resolution which would mandate the Independent Expert to finalise the draft guidelines with a view to adopting in 2010 these guidelines. The Council should act in a coherent way on a central theme that was linked to the protection and promotion of all economic, social and cultural rights.

RAUL MARTINEZ (Paraguay) thanked the Independent Expert on extreme poverty for her timely report and said that the topic of extreme poverty was particularly relevant to developing countries. Paraguay therefore hoped that the guidelines would result in tangible recommendations on how to tackle this very serious problem. The food crisis, as well as rising fuel costs, had only exacerbated the problem of extreme poverty in many nations around the globe. Paraguay added that the right to education was crucial in combating social exclusion and extreme poverty.

OSMAN TAT (United States) said the United States read with interest the report from the mission of the two Independent Experts to Bangladesh. The United States supported the goal of universal access to safe drinking water. Water and sanitation issues would be an important issue at the Millennium Development Goals Summit. The United States was particularly interested in the Independent Expert’s report on the role of non-state actors in the provision of water and said that only 5 per cent of the world population was served by large transnational corporations. Many more were served by local small-scale providers, for example in Africa almost 50 per cent of the urban population relied on small-scale providers like private truck vendors and kiosk operators. This raised a very important issue and the debate had focused on highly visible transnational corporations while the observations of the Independent Expert seemed just as relevant in the context of medium-sized national companies and small-scale service providers which often operated unregulated. Their activities could have a significant impact on the realisation of non-discriminatory access to water and the United States wanted to hear more specific ideas regarding what States should do if those non-state actors limited non-discriminatory access to water.

JOAO ERNESTO CHRISTOFOLO (Brazil) said the report of the Independent Expert on water and sanitation brought a balanced overview of private participation in the provision of water and sanitation services, and the ensuing human rights responsibilities. Service provision was an essential component of the rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, and States could choose whether or how to involve the private sector in that activity. States must protect and promote human rights, and non-State providers must respect them, and the private sector must comply with the legal and regulatory frameworks, with priorities established in public policies. International cooperation must, first and foremost, aim at universalising access to water and sanitation, with a view to the timely accomplishment of target number three of Millennium Development Goal number seven, namely to halve the proportion of the population without access to water and sanitation. The enhancement of the regulatory framework must not be a pre-condition for development assistance. The Independent Expert should address the issue of international cooperation in light of the principle of sovereignty over natural resources. With regard to the report on extreme poverty, the rationale of the report expressed a move towards the right direction in the development of the draft guiding principles, providing the international community with a balanced and result-oriented assessment of the common objective to improve the guiding principles on extreme poverty and human rights. Poverty reduction was a shared responsibility and required sustainable and predictable support from the international community at large.

Right of Reply

RAUL MARTINEZ (Paraguay), speaking in a right of reply, said that Paraguay had replied in a timely manner to the requests of the Independent Expert, as was stated in the report. Paraguay reiterated that it did not and would not tolerate the dumping of toxic wastes on its territory and was committed to protecting the health and safety of its citizens. Furthermore, Paraguay stated that it remained fully committed to the promotion and protection of the human rights of its citizens and fully supported the work of the Human Rights Council.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC10/094E