HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HEARS STATEMENTS FROM 13 DIGNITARIES AS IT CONTINUES ITS HIGH-LEVEL SEGMENT
The Human Rights Council this afternoon continued its High-Level Segment, hearing statements from 13 dignitaries.
Rodolfo Nin Novoa, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Uruguay, said that it was vital to do more to pre-empt factors of tension and division. Systematic violations of rights were inherent to crises which jeopardized international peace and security.
Dunya Maumoon, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Maldives, said that Maldives would remain relentless and steadfast in its call on the countries responsible for climate change to pay for loss and damage resulting from it.
Osman Mohammed Saleh, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Eritrea, said that although Eritrea currently enjoyed peace and security, it had been treated most unfairly by the Human Rights Council and for reasons that had nothing to do with human rights.
Alice Bah Kuhnke, Minister for Culture and Democracy of Sweden, was concerned about the shrinking of democratic space for journalists and civil society, gender inequalities and continued opposition to sexual and reproductive health and rights, and the increased risk for the human rights of sexual minorities and migrants.
Pavlo Klimkin, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, said that under Russian occupation, Crimea had become a “grey zone” where injustice, terror, intimidation, kidnapping and torture prevailed. There was an inherent need for thorough examination of all human rights violations.
Also speaking this afternoon were Dominic Ayine, Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister of Justice of Ghana; Anwar Mohamad Gargash, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of the United Arab Emirates; Bandar bin Mohammed Al-Aiban, Minister and President of the Human Rights Commission of Saudi Arabia; Tahani Ali Mohamed, State Minister at the Ministry of Justice of Sudan; Ha Kim Ngoc, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Viet Nam; Khadijetou Mbareck Fall, Minister Delegate in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mauritania; Mohammad Javad Ardeshir Larijani, Secretary of the High Council for Human Rights and Advisor to the Chief of Judiciary of Iran; and Luwellyn Landers, Deputy Minister of International Relations and Cooperation of South Africa.
At the end of the meeting, the following delegations spoke in right of reply: Azerbaijan, Syria, Turkey, Republic of Korea, Japan, Myanmar, Russian Federation, Armenia, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
The Council will resume its work on Wednesday, 2 March at 10 a.m. to continue and conclude its High-Level Segment.
High-Level Segment
RODOLFO NIN NOVOA, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Uruguay, said that the international community was witnessing a constant state of belligerence in many Middle Eastern countries, which risked spilling over and threatening wider regional peace and security. The international system had been overwhelmed, civilians and humanitarian workers were being attacked, while humanitarian aid was being denied. Human rights violations upset the peace within a country and affected international peace and security. However, non-intervention in the sovereign affairs of countries was an important principle. It was vital that today’s crises did not make the international community lose sight of tolerance and solidarity. Since January, Uruguay had been a member of the Human Rights Council, and had taken that as a sign of its commitment to the body’s guiding principles. More had to be done to prevent crises. It was vital to do more to pre-empt factors of tension and division at national, regional and international levels. The Human Rights Council had the potential for developing the preventive facet of the international system, because systematic violations of rights were inherent to crises which jeopardized international peace and security. As set out in the General Assembly resolution which established the Council, development, peace and security were interrelated and mutually reinforcing. The increasing activity of the Council should not be seen as the Achilles’ heel of the system, but as the evidence of success in drawing the attention of the international community. Sparing future generations from war was the international community’s common task.
DUNYA MAUMOON, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Maldives, stated that the fundamental rights of people, including those in small island developing States, should be protected. Maldives would remain relentless and steadfast in its call on the countries responsible for climate change to pay for the loss and the damage resulting from it. Investing in a country’s democracy was the best way of making the nation politically resilient. History had shown that it would take generations to bring and sustain a democratic change in a society. Since 2014, Maldives had reiterated its call to refrain from politicizing the Council and to maintain the focus on promoting and protecting human rights. Maldives’ advocacy on bringing the perspective of small island developing States to the Council had resulted in the establishment of a voluntary trust fund for those States, as well as for least developed countries as well as the Universal Periodic Review support for small island developing States. Reporting on every treaty body and mechanism was increasingly becoming a burden for small States. A pragmatic vision needed to be established that helped countries promote and protect human rights, rather than hindered them in that regard. Turning to world affairs, Ms. Maumoon said that every day one heard of “confused people” from across the world joining terrorist groups created in the name of Islam. The struggle against radicalism and terrorism needed stronger global and unified efforts in order to succeed. The international community ought to work together to cultivate respect for values and cultures that understood and respected the beauty of difference.
OSMAN MOHAMMED SALEH, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Eritrea, welcomed the fact that human rights were discussed more and more prominently on the international agenda. Eritrea was a nation born in the struggle for freedom and for whom human dignity remained the top priority. The consolidation of human rights was a work in progress for all nations, and entailed that each nation focused first and foremost on strengthening its own national system instead of relying on arms and wealth to accuse and bully others. The current migrant crisis had posed a severe test to many nations, and a few efforts had been made to tackle its root causes, including the current world situation of massive inequality and gross injustice. Eritrea currently enjoyed peace and security, and was focusing on the development and consolidation of the dignity of its citizens. Eritrea had, however, been treated very unfairly by the Human Rights Council and for reasons that had nothing to do with human rights. Some other nations had met the same fate as Eritrea, while those who had the protection of big powers enjoyed impunity despite their sordid human rights records. Such a selective approach of double standards based on political expediency of the powerful made a mockery of human rights and demeaned the Human Rights Council. In the interest of human rights and the integrity of international institutions, that shameful practice needed to come to an end.
DOMINIC AYINE, Deputy Attorney-General and Deputy Minister of Justice of Ghana, expressed Ghana’s commitment to the 2030 Agenda and underlined the links between human rights, sustainable development and peace and security. Ghana was deeply concerned about gross violations of human rights and attacks against civilians in the world, including in Africa, while women and children in the context of an armed conflict were particularly vulnerable. The unprecedented flow of migrants and refugees caused by the ongoing conflicts around the world had challenged States’ commitment to uphold international human rights, and refugee and humanitarian laws. Mr. Ayine said that the international community had to uphold its shared responsibility to protect populations from mass atrocities, and saluted the memory of the former United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali and his Agenda for Peace, which emphasized the importance of preventive diplomacy. He then echoed other Secretary-Generals’ calls on States not to use sovereignty as a shield behind which to abuse human rights or remain indifferent. More had to be done by all countries and the international community working together to take measures not only to end the ongoing conflicts, but also to prevent the outbreak of future violations through the adoption of laws and policies that expanded the democratic space for the exercise of fundamental freedoms by all citizens. Governments had to allow civil society and human rights defenders to operate freely. Measures to promote non-discrimination, social justice and the rights of minorities needed to be strengthened.
ANWAR MOHAMAD GARGASH, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of the United Arab Emirates, stated that he was pleased that the United Arab Emirates had been elected to a second term in the Human Rights Council. Fostering values of tolerance, social cohesion and human rights were key pillars to achieving stability in the region. Mr. Gargash highlighted specific advances made by the United Arab Emirates on the rights of women, children, and labour rights. The United Arab Emirates continued to strive for equality for women, who were partners in society and whose critical role was widely accepted. The United Arab Emirates had recently presented the steps taken on the implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, which showed that progress regarding women’s educational attainment levels, health and political participation. Achieving empowerment in the work place was also in the making through the National Strategy for the Empowerment of Emirati Women. The United Arab Emirates also championed gender equality at the international level, and was serving its second term on the UN Women Executive Board. A liaison office of UN Women would soon be established in Abu Dhabi. The United Arab Emirates supported education for all children, and worked in partnership with the United Nations Children’s Fund and other organizations to ensure that worldwide. The ongoing effort of the United Arab Emirates to improve the existing labour conditions was also a priority, and measures had been taken to improve work contracts and benefits. On the regional level, there were multiple and protracted conflicts, associated with the denial of basic rights. The United Arab Emirates was resolved to stand against the expanding threat of extremism and terrorism. That was why the political resolution of crises was of paramount importance in Syria, Libya and Yemen.
BANDAR BIN MOHAMMED ALI-AIBAN, Minister and President of the Human Rights Commission of Saudi Arabia, said that the Human Rights Council was taking place while serious violations of human rights were occurring throughout the world. As everyone realised the interdependence and universality of human rights, they needed not forget that the diversity of human rights and values was a way to protect them. Therefore, imposing a single means of promoting human rights was not warranted. The protection of human rights in Saudi Arabia derived from the Sharia law. The reform processes in Saudi Arabia in turn reflected that belief, and involved the judiciary, the economy, development, and the promotion of women. The authorisation of judiciary procedures and programmes for training of judges was ongoing and importance was given to the independence of the judiciary. In the framework of the empowerment of women, a recent local election had witnessed successful participation of female candidates. Regarding regional issues, Saudi Arabia deplored the suffering of the Palestinian people due to the oppression by Israel, and reaffirmed the rights of the Palestinian people for an independent State with Jerusalem as its capital. The Syrian people were experiencing the biggest catastrophe since the Second World War, due to the violations of human rights by the Assad regime, Daesh and Hezbollah. Saudi Arabia called for a comprehensive solution that would lead the Syrian people out of that crisis, and a solution in which Assad would have no role. Saudi Arabia had reinforced its financial support for Syrians during the Fourth Donor Conference in 2015, with a contribution of $ 100 million.
TAHANI ALI MOHAMED, State Minister, Ministry of Justice of Sudan, said that due to the expanding scope and the increasing numbers of victims, especially from vulnerable groups, among them women, children and the elderly who were fleeing conflict, migrants needed assistance and should not be faced with a discourse of incitement and discrimination on the basis of race, colour and creed. Sudan had been receiving those refugees. Turning to national achievements, Ms. Ali Mohamed said that the Sudanese Human Rights Commission was working towards promoting and protecting human rights. It received complaints and communications and investigated them, and it worked to spread awareness in different sectors of society. The Constitutional Court was maintaining its role as the guardian of liberties. She thanked donor States and asked other concerned parties to provide technical support to Sudan. A national commission on transparency, honesty and anti-corruption had been established in 2016. The 10-year plan to promote and protect human rights had achieved a lot of progress in reviewing national mechanisms. Despite many challenges faced by the country, including foreign debt, Sudan today stood at the conclusion of a process to achieve peace. The Government had been resolute in continuing negotiations with all parties to achieve an agreement that could be subscribed to by all parties, and that had required the joining of efforts which was based on comprehensive and just peace, which, in turn, was based on accountability and the rule of law.
HA KIM NGOC, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Viet Nam, said that Viet Nam appreciated the Universal Periodic Review process which had proved to be one of the most significant successes of the Human Rights Council, as it offered opportunities for all countries to assess their human rights progress and share experiences and best practices. Engagement and cooperation were also key factors leading to the historic 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development that the international community had adopted six months earlier. The Council should focus more on social and economic rights, and the challenges facing persons with disabilities deserved more of the international community’s attention. In Viet Nam, 7.8 per cent of the population were living with disabilities. The Council should also study further the impact of climate change on all aspects of human rights, and incorporate into its agenda important components of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. Viet Nam had successfully lifted millions of people out of poverty, significantly reduced maternal and infant mortalities, and achieved many other targets enumerated in the Millennium Development Goals. However, much remained to be done for a developing country like Viet Nam to ensure everyone’s full enjoyment of human rights.
ALICE BAH KUHNKE, Minister for Culture and Democracy of Sweden, said that democracy beyond free and fair elections had taken important steps globally. However, that development could not be taken for granted. The Swedish Government was particularly concerned by three tendencies: shrinking of the democratic space for journalists and civil society, gender inequalities and the continued opposition to sexual and reproductive health and rights, and the increased risk for the human rights of minorities, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons, and migrants. A free and independent media was a foundation of democracy and rule of law. As such, the safety of journalists concerned all. Domestic violence against women remained a global plague, affecting more than one third of all women. That meant that over a billion women globally were victims of violence. Ms. Kuhnke highlighted the importance of sexual and reproductive health and rights, which was the cornerstone in the full realization of human rights in the strife to ensure better life for women and girls. Racism and the persecution of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons, and the discrimination of indigenous peoples and migrants also required urgent action. Such acts were infecting communities and they were denying equal value of their human rights. Such acts were also an obstacle to development. Ms. Kuhnke urged all States to combat persecution wherever it was manifested.
PAVLO KLIMKIN, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, reminded that two years earlier the Russian Federation had come to Ukrainian soil with arms and military personnel, just like it had done in Georgia in 2008. The Russian aggression against Ukraine had led to 9,000 deaths, more than 20,000 injured and almost two million displaced. During those two years of aggression, a 40,000-strong army had been built up in the Donbas, financed, equipped and maintained by the Russian Federation and commanded by Russian officers. Under the Russian occupation, Crimea had become a “grey zone”, where injustice, terror, intimidation, kidnapping and torture prevailed. The occupying authorities committed systematic and large-scale violations of fundamental rights and freedoms, waged a hidden war against dissidents, destroyed signs of linguistic, religious and cultural identity of Ukrainians and the indigenous peoples of Crimea. The Ukrainian Government believed that there was no place for impunity for any human rights violations and it was investigating each and every case of such violations on its territory. The Government of Ukraine insisted on the importance of the Minsk Agreements and their implementation by the Russian Federation. There was an inherent need for a thorough examination of all human rights violations.
KHADIJETOU MBARECK FALL, Minister Delegate in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mauritania, said that Mauritania implemented a balanced foreign policy and had strengthened its diplomatic presence around the world, actively promoting peace and providing support to Mauritanian citizens abroad. Human rights had to be viewed as a comprehensive set of interrelated norms. Their effective implementation required their mainstreaming in development policies, diplomacy and governance. Mauritania had played an important role in settling conflicts, including in the north of Mali, and combatting extremism and violent crime. Mauritania was undertaking efforts to reach a solution to the situation in Burundi. The promotion and protection of human rights, based on the principle of tolerance and inclusiveness, had been a cornerstone of Mauritania’s policies. Indeed, the Government had taken measures to enhance social cohesion and justice and equality for all citizens. It had also adopted a roadmap for the elimination of contemporary forms of slavery, and programmes on access to justice and other services for the victims of slavery. The Government would also continue its efforts to eradicate poverty, combat corruption and improve access to health and education services despite financial difficulties faced by the country. A national mechanism had been established for the prevention of torture. The Constitutional review had also further bolstered human rights protection. Mauritania actively cooperated with United Nations human rights mechanisms, including treaty bodies and Special Procedures.
MOHAMMAD JAVAD ARDESHIR LARIJANI, Secretary of the High Council for Human Rights and Advisor to the Chief of Judiciary of Iran, said the fiftieth anniversary of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights afforded the inimitable opportunity to promote those ideals and evaluate the achievements as well as the challenges ahead. The Human Rights Council’s tenth anniversary should be an opportunity to reflect on its achievements and how to avoid repeating mistakes of the past. It was notably crucial to recognize the role of democracy and the promotion of human rights. It was regrettable that self-proclaimed leaders ignored such democratic principles in engaging with the Council. The Council should continue to function in a non-selective, non-politicized and non-confrontational manner, and should bear in mind that the universality of human rights should not overlook the cultural background and traditions of each State. It was worth noting that the Universal Periodic Review had evolved into an objective mechanism, although some improvements could be done. It was important that all States engaged in this process. It was imperative that a plan of action should address the situation of Palestinian people. On Syria, Iran’s position had been to respect the Syrian population’s will, while respecting the independence and sovereignty of the country, and to oppose terrorism as a mean to advance political agenda. Concerted efforts to combat terrorism and a global campaign to ensure humanitarian aid were needed.
LUWELLYN LANDERS, Deputy Minister of International Relations and Cooperation of South Africa, said that the anniversary of the two Covenants also coincided with the twentieth anniversary of the South African Constitution. The 1996 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa was predicated on the United Nations Bill of Rights and guaranteed the rights enshrined in both Covenants. The international community had been, at the time of the two Covenants, full of hopes and dreams that the ideal of free human beings enjoying freedom from fear and want could only be achieved if conditions were created whereby everyone could enjoy both sets of rights. Fifty years on, most of these rights remained largely unfulfilled. The central question for all was whether they were capable of the sustained and creative ingenuity which would result in the creation of the international human rights system that would address the interests and aspirations of all in a balanced and mutually beneficial manner. Accordingly, in celebrating the tenth anniversary of the creation of the Human Rights Council, the world needed to consider whether the Council had been able to discharge its responsibility to promoting universal respect for the protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction of any kind and in a fair and equal manner. The 1993 Vienna World Conference on Human Rights recognised the universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, and even more importantly, the right to development. This right as well as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development were two documents that sought to address the failure to implement internationally agreed goals.
Right of Reply
Azerbaijan, speaking in a right of reply, said that there had been an ongoing conflict for more than 20 years between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The underlying cause of this conflict was the occupation by Armenia of the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan. The principle of non-use of force in this conflict was flagrantly violated by Armenia. Azerbaijan urged the international community to induce Armenia to abide by this principle as envisaged by the United Nations Security Council Resolution of 1993 which was still not implemented. This was the only settlement to the conflict.
Syria, speaking in a right of reply, said France, Lithuania, Qatar and the Netherlands had made false accusations against the Syrian Government. Syria rejected these lies propelled by its enemies, which tried to torpedo Syria through terror. Syria continued to protect its civilians and combat terrorism. At the same time, Syria sought to cooperate with the United Nations and the Red Cross to facilitate humanitarian aid. It was shameful that France exploited the suffering of citizens through an economic blockade as well as presenting draft resolutions in the United Nations to cover terrorists. Additionally, all were aware that the Qatari and Saudi regimes were supplying terrorists in Syria.
Turkey, speaking in a right of reply, said Turkey was countering terrorism, and its efforts when it came to international cooperation to that end were well-known. Deploring the slightest hint that brought Turkey’s determination into question, he said that in Turkey, not a single person was convicted on charges related to journalistic activities. The rule of law was the utmost guarantee for the fair conclusion of processes.
Republic of Korea, speaking in a right of reply, said in response to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea that the Republic of Korea did not accept distorted remarks on “North Korean” defectors.
Japan, speaking in a right of reply, said in response to the statement made by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea that claims and figures that that country’s representative had cited in the context of World War II were groundless and based on an erroneous understanding of facts. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea should listen to the calls of the international community and take action on improving its human rights situation.
Myanmar, speaking in a right of reply, said in response to remarks made yesterday and today that Myanmar was an open society that enjoyed freedom of faith and expression; it never misused these freedoms.
Russian Federation, speaking in a right of reply, expressed regret that the Ukrainian Foreign Minister had used the high-level debate for a blatantly political statement. It was unacceptable to introduce to the Council legal status questions. Politicized statements were an attempt to distract from the armed conflict.
Armenia, speaking in a right of reply, reminded that it had always acted according to international standards, had respected the cease fire agreement and had abstained from hostilities. Armenia had repeatedly stated its commitment to the non-use of force and a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. Azerbaijan was doing everything to undermine the cease fire and such behaviour should be condemned by the international community.
Saudi Arabia, speaking in a right of reply, rejected the legitimacy of the statements made by Denmark and the Netherlands regarding capital punishment. Saudi Arabia witnessed the same lies by the Syrian regime, which was no longer legitimate. The Commission of Inquiry had issued information that had caused outrage. Saudi Arabia had been seeking a political solution to the Syrian crisis.
Qatar, speaking in a right of reply, noted that clichés only diverted attention from the crimes perpetrated by the regime in Damascus. The Syrian Government did not even deserve to be called a regime, but rather a gang. The Assad regime was illegitimate and continued to exist thanks to the blood of civilians. The real terrorism was practiced by the Assad regime.
Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea, speaking in a right of reply, said that Japan had committed crimes against humanity against a number of peoples in Asia. In Korea alone, Japan had forced 200,000 women into military sexual slavery during its military occupation for more than 40 years. The facts and figures in the statement were well documented: in 1996 the then United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women had estimated that more than 200,000 women had suffered as victims of military sexual slavery. The Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea urged Japan to address the crimes against humanity it had committed and urged “South Korea” to immediately stop abducting fellow nationals from the North.
Azerbaijan, speaking in a second right of reply, said the Armenian President had boasted that his country was one of most militarised in the word. It was critical for effective peacebuilding purposes that Armenia withdrew from Nagorno-Karabakh. The major cause of incidents was the continued unlawful presence of the Armenian armed forces in Azerbaijan.
Syria, speaking in a second right of reply, said Saudi Arabia was not well placed to give lessons on democracy and human rights as it had no constitution. The statement of the Saudi representative on the conditions of a political solution in Syria violated the principles of the United Nations, including the principles of sovereignty and non-interference. The statement of the Saudi delegate was an abominable transgression of international law.
Japan, speaking in a second right of reply, said that it was regrettable that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had not responded to concerns formulated by the international community.
Armenia, speaking in a second right of reply, said that the people of the Nagorno-Karabakh region had exercised their right to self-determination in accordance with the United Nations Charter. The very status of this region was the subject of negotiations which Azerbaijan continued to reject. Furthermore, Azerbaijan had quadrupled its military budget in recent years.
Saudi Arabia, speaking in a second right of reply to the statement by “Assad’s representative”, said that this regime was a criminal regime that had lost its legitimacy and caused the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians. Saudi Arabia was ready to pursue land operations should this be agreed upon by Members of the coalition.
Republic of Korea, speaking in a second right of reply, rejected allegations by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and noted that “North Korean defectors” were the result of systematic human rights violations by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, speaking in a second right of reply, condemned the refusal by Japan to recognize and address its crimes against humanity and the sexual slavery it had committed. It also urged “South Korea” to stop its activities targeting the people of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
For use of the information media; not an official record
HRC16/008E