COUNCIL DISCUSSES HUMAN RIGHTS AND TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS, RIGHT TO HEALTH AND HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS

The Human Rights Council this afternoon heard the presentation of the reports of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders.

John Ruggie, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said there appeared to be little movement in the direct responsibilities corporations could have under the international bill of human rights and related instruments, and this fact left a sizeable protection gap for victims. Unfortunately, the substantial expansion of corporate voluntary initiatives had not yet engaged many state-owned enterprises, which were becoming important players on the global stage. Recent developments in and around the Council demonstrated the urgency of developing practical solutions, but it was important to get these right. Therefore, the mandate should be extended for an additional year in order to complete and build on the extensive work already done, and develop “views and recommendations” for the Council’s consideration.

Paul Hunt, the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, said there was a new maturity about the issue of health and human rights, with endeavours to integrate policies at national and international levels. New approaches and skills were developing in the human rights movement such as indicators, benchmarks and budget analysis. But there was more work needed on a number of serious health and human rights issues, such as maternal mortality, and a need for more health professionals to be involved in the health and human rights movement. The message needed to be put across that health and human rights were assets and allies for health professionals, and in this the Human Rights Council had a role to play.

Hina Jilani, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders, said the main focus of the report was on the situation of human rights defenders working in the field of economic, social and cultural rights. In a significant number of cases brought to the Special Rapporteur’s attention, it was the denial of economic, social and cultural rights that had spurred action by defenders that had led to the violation of their human rights. While this reality was more marked in the Asian and the Latin American regions, it was a global trend that had become relevant to any discussion on strategies for the protection of defenders. Defence of labour rights was the most prevalent issue when it came to violations against defenders working on economic, social and cultural rights.

During the interactive debate following the presentation of the reports, delegations raised a wide range of issues. On the work of the Special Representative on human rights and transnational corporations, delegations welcomed the attempt to map international standards of corporate responsibility and accountability, saying that Mr. Ruggie’s report also identified a lag in performance of State-owned companies concerning the adoption of best practices, and he was asked if there were good examples of State-owned enterprises that had adopted voluntary principles or the Global Compact. With regards to the report of the Special Rapporteur on the highest level of health, delegates said health and human rights addressed a lot of common ground, and this was complementary and mutually reinforcing, and the report made the right to health more accessible, practical and effective, being related to specific objectives, such as the Millennium Development Goals. The work done by the Special Representative on human rights defenders relating to defenders of women’s’, lesbian, gay, and transgender rights was commendable, delegations said, and asked what strategies could be introduced to better protect human rights defenders in circumstances where a culture of impunity for violations was unchecked.

Speaking as concerned countries were Sweden and Brazil.

Speaking this afternoon were the representatives of the Sovereign Order of Malta, Argentina, Germany for the European Union, Uzbekistan, Guatemala, Australia, Indonesia, Norway, United Kingdom, New Zealand, Peru, Tunisia, Switzerland, Ecuador, Mexico, Pakistan, Mali, Ireland, Iran, Russian Federation, Brazil, Bangladesh, Cambodia, France, Canada, Cameroon, Belgium, United States, Syria, and Cuba.

The next meeting of the Council will be at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 29 March, when it will conclude the interactive debate on human rights and transnational corporations, the right to health and human rights defenders.


Reports before the Council

The Council has before it the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, John Ruggie: business and human rights: mapping international standards of responsibility and accountability for corporate acts (A/HRC/4/35 and Corr.1 and Add.1-4), which looks at the issues of State duty to protect; corporate responsibility and accountability for international crimes; corporate responsibility for other human rights violations under international law; soft law mechanisms; and self-regulation. The report concludes that the permissive conditions for business-related human rights abuses today are created by a misalignment between economic forces and governance capacity. It also notes that it is the most vulnerable people and communities pay the heaviest price for these governance gaps. No single silver bullet can resolve the business and human rights challenge: a broad array of measures is required, by all relevant actors. Mapping existing and emerging standards and practices was an essential first step. To do that, the Special Representative would welcome a one-year extension to complete the assignment.

A first addendum (A/HRC/4/35/Add.1) contains the report of the Special Representative on State responsibilities to regulate and adjudicate corporate activities under the United Nations core human rights treaties: an overview of treaty body commentaries. This research has shown that the treaty-based human rights machinery has been paying increasing attention to the regulation of States and adjudication of corporate activities, and already plays an important role in elaborating the duties of States. It concludes that it would seem beneficial if the treaty bodies were to engage in discussions among themselves on this issue, as well as to address more specifically these duties.

A second addendum contains the report of the Special Representative on Corporate responsibility under international law and issues in extraterritorial regulation, which provides a summary the four international legal workshops convened by the Special Representative in 2006 to assist in clarifying some of the key legal issues raised by his mandate. The workshops, convened in London, Oslo, Brussels and New York, addressed the following issues: government regulation of corporate human rights issues; corporate complicity in human rights violations; the role of extraterritorial jurisdiction in improving the accountability of transnational corporations; and the bases for attributing human rights responsibilities to transnational corporations under international law.

A third Addendum contains the report of the Special Representative on Human Rights Policies and Management Practices: Results from questionnaire surveys of Governments and Fortune Global 500 firms, which sets out the results of and provides analysis on two surveys conducted by the Special Representative: a survey asking States to identify current practices of regulating, adjudicating, and otherwise influencing the role of corporations with respect to human rights; and a survey asking the Fortune Global 500 firms about their human rights policies and practices.

A fourth Addendum contains the report of the Special Representative on Business recognition of human rights: Global patterns, regional and sectoral variations, which summarizes the human rights standards referenced or invoked in the policies of three types of business organization: a cross-section of more than 300 companies from all regions of the world; 8 collective initiatives; and 5 socially responsible investment indices. Among its findings were that labour rights enjoy greater business recognition than any other human rights; that recognition of non-labour rights is less prevalent across the board; and that company policies and practices, collective initiatives, and socially responsible investment indices all address human rights in reporting.

The Council has before it the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises (A/HRC/4/74), describing principles and characteristics of human rights impact assessments for business, including similarities to environmental and social impact assessments, and provides updates on current initiatives. Among the observations in its Outlook chapter, the report concludes that, while human rights impact assessments are not currently required by any law, lending institution or standard, it should be reasonable to expect that such assessments will be undertaken for significant prospective investments in conflict zones or areas where human rights abuses have been prevalent. Furthermore, given the proliferation of public information on human rights, including the numerous specialized resources for business, there is no excuse for any company, lender or investor to claim to be unaware that their investments could impact human rights.

The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Paul Hunt (A/HRC/4/28 and Add.1-3), which signals some of the progress made by the health and human rights movement in the last decade. Since 2000, numerous reports have explored how the right to health can be operationalized. Law cases, literature and courses on health and human rights are increasingly common. There is a new maturity about the health and human rights movement as it endeavours to integrate human rights into health policies at the national and international levels. In addition to the traditional human rights techniques, such as "naming and shaming", the health and human rights movement is also using approaches such as indicators, benchmarks and impact assessments. The report also focuses on key obstacles that lie ahead: the inadequate engagement within the health and human rights movement of established human rights non-governmental organizations, and with health professionals. In its third chapter, the report explains that judicial accountability has enhanced protection for the right to health and other health-related rights, and has also deepened understanding of what these human rights mean. This chapter includes a sample of cases that signal how various tribunals have interpreted and applied health-related human rights. A final chapter contains the Special Rapporteur's conclusions.

A first addendum to A/HRC/28 contains, on a country-by-country basis, summaries of communications sent by the Special Rapporteur between 2 December 2005 and 1 December 2006. These include summaries of urgent appeals and letters of allegation, as well as follow-up communications. The addendum also includes replies received by the Special Rapporteur during this period.

A second addendum contains the report of the Special Rapporteur on his visit to Sweden, where he says the standard of living, health status and quality of health care are among the best in the world. A major challenge, however, is to integrate the right to health into domestic policymaking processes in Sweden.

A third addendum is a preliminary note on the Special Rapporteur's missions to Uganda and to the offices of the Executive Directors of the Nordic-Baltic countries at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (to examine the role of Sweden in relation to the highest attainable standard of health in the context of its membership of those institutions). The Special Rapporteur notes with particular regret that the health sector in Uganda is seriously underfunded, and says the Government’s present level of investment in health is inconsistent with Uganda’s international human rights obligations.

The Council has before it the report submitted by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders, Hina Jilani (A/HRC/4/37 and Add.1-2). Chapter I of the report gives an account of the activities undertaken by the mandate-holder during the reporting year, and includes some reflections on the participation of defenders and defenders’ organizations in the work of the Human Rights Council to date. Chapter II focuses on the situation of human rights defenders working in the field of economic, social and cultural rights, and highlights violations against the rights accorded to these defenders by the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights. Chapter III examines human rights defenders who are at particular risk, and considers the risks involved when defending the rights of indigenous people and minorities, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons and women human rights defenders. In chapter IV, the Special Representative outlines some recommendations, for example, that judiciaries must, in particular, be vigilant and consistent in upholding the right to peaceful action for attaining social and economic rights.

[A/HRC/4/37/Add.1 was not immediately available]

A second addendum contains the report of the Special Representative's trip to Brazil, which describes the human rights community in Brazil and the strategies they have adopted to confront the various trends that result in the violation of human rights. The Special Representative concludes that despite positive developments, there are serious concerns regarding the security of human rights defenders. With a view to address the serious problem of criminalization of human rights activity, among other things, it is recommended that the Government collect and analyse the cases brought against human rights defenders in order to propose legislation or policy guidelines to prevent prosecution of defenders for carrying out activities in defence of human rights.


Presentation of Reports on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations, Right to Health, and the Human Rights Defenders

JOHN RUGGIE, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said widespread stakeholder engagement had confirmed the importance and timeliness of the mandate. It was fair to add that the mandate had also helped clarify what the current standards were, legal and otherwise. This was all to the good because in the debate that preceded his mandate, factual claims about corporate obligations had been so entangled with normative preferences and institutional interests that little agreement existed, making it more difficult to reach practical solutions. The Representative’s first conclusion concerned the State duty to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, a key obligation under United Nations core human rights treaties, regional human rights conventions, and customary international law. Judging from concerns expressed by UN and regional human rights bodies, not all State organs had appeared to have internalized the full meaning of the duty to protect.

By far the most consequential legal development had been the growing potential for companies to be held liable for international crimes, and the report spelled out the complex process whereby that was unfolding. Few companies ever directly committed acts that amounted to international crimes, but there was a greater risk of their facing allegations of complicity in such crimes. However, there appeared to be little movement in the direct responsibilities corporations could have under the International Bill of Human Rights and related instruments, and that fact left a sizeable protection gap for victims, as not all Governments recognized all relevant human rights instruments.

Beyond the legal sphere, companies had adopted policies and practices voluntarily, triggered by their assessment of human rights-related risks and opportunities, often under pressure from civil society and local communities. Unfortunately, the substantial expansion of corporate voluntary initiatives had not yet engaged many State-owned enterprises, which were becoming important players on the global stage. Even leading firms did not always fully meet expectations of twenty-first century accountability standards; relatively few conducted systematic human rights impact assessments routinely. In the Representative’s judgement, no single measure would yield more immediate results in the human rights performance of firms than conducting such assessments routinely where a significant human rights impact could be expected. Recent developments in and around the Council demonstrated the urgency of developing practical solutions, but it was important to get those right. Therefore, the mandate should be extended for an additional year in order to complete and build on the extensive work already done, and develop views and recommendations for the Council’s consideration.

PAUL HUNT, Special Rapporteur on the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, observed that there was a new maturity about the issue of health and human rights, with endeavours to integrate policies at national and international levels. The health and human rights movement was also using new approaches such as indicators, benchmarks and impact assessments. But more work was needed on a number of serious health and human rights issues, such as maternal mortality, and there was a need for more health professionals to be involved in the health and human rights movement. The message needed to be put across that health and human rights were assets and allies for health professionals. The Human Rights Council had a role to play in that endeavour by helping to mainstream the human rights issue within the World Health Organization, where it remained marginal and under-resourced. That mainstreaming should extend to national health ministries.

Following a mission to Sweden, Mr. Hunt had seen excellent examples of international development policies. That was followed up with a review of their operationalization on the ground in Uganda. He thanked the two Governments for their cooperation, saying the issue would be reported on more fully at a later time. One of the Special Rapporteur's reports last year looked at maternal mortality, which was a human rights catastrophe on a scale that dwarfed many other issues, such as forced disappearance and the death penalty. The issue had been neglected by the Human Rights Commission, and the Council was urged to give the issue sustained attention. Mr. Hunt had been invited to make a study of this issue in India, and he thanked the Government for its invitation. He had also been invited to Ecuador to urgently assess the issue of aerial spraying of illicit crops across the Colombian border, and the consequent health damage to the indigenous people, and hoped that he would be able to add a visit there to his already crowded schedule for the year.

On other issues, the Special Rapporteur mentioned his continued guidance to pharmaceutical companies on access to medicines, and his concerns over the situation in Iraq and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. In Iraq, of special concern was the situation of refugees and internally displaced persons, whose access to healthcare, water, sanitation and medication was extremely precarious. The Iraq humanitarian Conference on displacement scheduled in April would be an important event in that regard. In the Occupied Palestinian Territories, owing to the curtailing of funds by Israel and the donor community, health and emergency services were in crisis. The Special Rapporteur had publicly expressed concern at the effect of sanctions against the Palestinian Authority. Those were not economic sanctions, but health sanctions. International responses so far had been inadequate. Last year donors had failed to give proper weight to the human rights of sick, infirm and elderly Palestinians. The issue needed an urgent remedy.

HINA JILANI, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders, said that her report presented the global situation of human rights defenders, focusing mainly on the situation of human rights defenders working in the field of economic, social and cultural rights and the serious nature of the violations that those defenders experienced because of their activities. In a significant number of cases brought to the Special Rapporteur’s attention, it had been the denial of economic, social and cultural rights that had spurred action by defenders and that had led to the further violation of their human rights. While that reality was more marked in the Asian and the Latin American regions, it was a global trend that had become relevant to any discussion on strategies for the protection of human rights defenders. The report depicted the situation of defenders working on land rights and environmental issues, labour rights, including the rights of rural workers, and social rights, particularly for the protection of children against all forms of exploitation and for the elimination of discrimination against women. The report also highlighted the plight of defenders working for the right to adequate housing and against forced eviction, the right to health. and the right to food. Defence of labour rights was the most prevalent issue when it came to violations against defenders working on economic, social and cultural rights.

The violations reported were very serious and included summary executions, torture, other violent means of repression and death threats, Ms. Jilani said. The number of countries that had employed extreme measures to repress peaceful activities of those defenders had continued to grow. A major challenge for those working for economic, social and cultural rights in general had been the lack of recognition that their work was related to the promotion and protection of human rights, and they received less of a response from the authorities to concerns they expressed regarding the rights they were seeking to defend. The national legal framework for the protection of economic, social and cultural rights was often weak. Those gaps had direct implications for the protection of activities for the defence of economic, social and cultural rights, making those defenders more vulnerable to violations of their rights by state and non-state entities and placing them at a greater risk of harm. The report also drew attention to the obligation of State parties to international human rights instruments and, in particular, to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to guarantee that all economic, social and cultural rights were allowed to be exercised.

Action for the attainment of economic, social and cultural rights was increasingly manifested through collective and public action, Ms. Jilani said. The report made the case that peaceful collective action was a legitimate means of drawing public attention to matters concerning human rights. Civil society was urged to give due attention to those issues and to allay any concerns of the civil society stakeholders whose importance and relevance to the functions of the Council could not be underestimated. The Special Representative had been unable to conduct any country visit during the reporting period. However, she had provided a report on her earlier visit to Brazil. The report highlighted the struggle for the attainment of economic, social and cultural rights, and emphasized the political and social significance of social movements in Brazil and their relevance to the strong constitutional framework for the promotion and protection of human rights. The Special Representative had made recommendations for the consideration of the Government, and was looking forward to serious measures to address the issues raised in the report.


Statements by Concerned Countries

CHARLOTTA SCHLYTER (Sweden), speaking as a concerned country, said the visit of the Special Rapporteur had been very much welcomed, and both the Government, the Governmental authorities and civil society had highly valued the opportunity for constructive dialogue on issues pertaining to the right to the highest attainable standard of health. The report, its findings and recommendations were being studied with great interest, and Sweden hoped to continue the dialogue, particularly in relation to its recommendations, but also in relation to other measures that could be needed in the field of health.

The highest attainable standard of health was a high priority for the Sweden, however, there was still room for improvement, for example when it came to accessibility to health care. Sweden had also experienced difficulties in reorganizing its mental care system. To amend those imperfections, the Government had implemented a national health care warranty, and was committing SEK 750 million (approximately 70 million euros) to improving mental health care in the three years to come. Sweden was determined to continue its efforts to combat ill health and disparity in the right to health, and would continue its work to provide good quality health care, and looked forward to continued cooperation with the Special Rapporteur towards achieving those goals.

ESTELA WAKSBERG GUERRINI (Brazil), speaking as a concerned country, said the situation in Brazil today was quite different from that in 2005 when Hina Jilani had visited. The National Programme for Protection of Human Rights Defenders was now well established in several States. The programme aimed to protect human rights defenders from threats and vulnerability, to dismantle aggressors’ activities and to combat criminalization of defenders’ activities. This year there would be a national programme to map the risks faced by human rights defenders, establish vulnerability criteria and hold workshops to discuss interim reports. Effective measures had also been taken in Brazil to bring the police into the protection programme system, through training, specialized protection services and other initiatives. Brazil asked for further guidance from the Special Rapporteur on fostering dialogue with human rights defenders, on the land rights struggle, and balancing the need for development with that of protection of local populations’ rights.

Interactive Dialogue on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations, the Right to Health, and Human Rights Defenders

MARIE THERESE PICTET-ALTHANN (Sovereign Order of Malta) thanked the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. Medical care for the sick and the poor was at the origin of the Sovereign Order of Malta and had remained at the centre of its humanitarian activities throughout history. In the report, the Special Rapporteur analysed the role of health professionals as a bridge between human rights and health, but attention had also been drawn to their inadequate engagement in the health and human rights movement. The Special Rapporteur had suggested a number of steps to be taken by ministries of health, professional associations and those working in health-related sectors. The Sovereign Order of Malta asked the Special Rapporteur if he could elaborate further on what progress had been made and what measures were being taken to implement the proposals for a human rights bases approach by the health community. The Order of Malta shared the Special Rapporteur’s concern on maternal mortality. With regard to neglected diseases, the delegation wanted to refer to the Sub-Commission’s resolution on discrimination against leprosy-affected persons and their families.

SERGIO CERDA (Argentina) said Mr. Ruggie's report on transnational corporations and human rights had made it possible to make progress on that complex matter and to sketch out a possible framework for consensus. The Council should renew that mandate in order to enable the mandate holder to continue his study and make recommendations. In this area, Argentina wondered how to give more weight to persuading and convincing States about the enforcement of human rights, rather than simply sanctioning violations, and also how violations could be addressed in cases where victims lacked effective remedies and resources.

On the report on human rights defenders, in compliance with the relevant resolution of the General Assembly, the Council should consider all human rights violations. Regarding discrimination on the basis of gender, what preventive measures would the Special Representative suggest in that area which related to entrenched traditions and beliefs?

MARTIN HUTH (Germany), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said some human rights defenders working on economic and social rights were seen as challenging State policies, rather than as defenders of international human rights. What could be done to change that view? The work Hina Jilani had done relating to defenders of women's and lesbian and gay and transgender rights was commendable. Had there been any progress on necessary additional protection measures? Addressing Mr. Hunt, the European Union asked what were the most important aspects that a health data system should capture, and what was the content of the paper Mr. Hunt was drafting on the relationship between equity and health. Addressing Mr. Ruggie, the European Union welcomed the attempt to map international standards of corporate responsibility and accountability, and asked whether Mr. Ruggie could specify areas in which he thought he would be making recommendations, whether there was growing consensus on voluntary standards companies should keep, and how far the extension of individual accountability was developing in relation to developing countries.

ESEMURAT KANYAZOV (Uzbekistan) thanked Ms Jilani for her report. In Uzbekistan, a legislative basis had been created to protect human rights. National institutions for human rights had been established, among others the national centre for human rights. The country had acceded to more than 60 human rights treaties. Since 2000, 80 periodic reports had been submitted to United Nations bodies. A special law on guarantees for the work of non-governmental organizations had been issued, and there was a national association of non-governmental organizations in operation in Uzbekistan.

CARLOS RAMIRO MARTINEZ ALVARADO (Guatemala) said, with regard to the report by Ms. Jilani, in 2006 Guatemala had received visits from the Special Rapporteurs on indigenous peoples, on enforced disappearances, and on summary executions. Guatemala had also appeared before a range of treaty bodies. In 2007, there had also already been a number of country visits by Special Procedures. That showed that Guatemala had conducted a great amount of work, and had standing invitations for the mechanisms and Special Procedures on an international scale. Ms. Jilani’s visit had been delayed for logistical reasons, but the Government had maintained its interest in having her visit, and had extended an invitation to her for that purpose last October. That invitation had been accepted.

ROBYN MUDIE (Australia) said Hina Jilani's report was comprehensive. Australia was committed to the promotion of human rights without fear or obstruction. The report had identified a global trend in which human rights defenders were themselves subject to violations of their rights to liberty, expression and assembly. In that connection, Australia was concerned about the brutal treatment of the Save Zimbabwe Coalition in Zimbabwe, and called for a return the rule of law. In Fiji, the Pacific Islands Forum had described the effect of the Military Government takeover on human rights defenders there as chilling. What strategies could be introduced to better protect human rights defenders in circumstances where a culture of impunity for violations was unchecked?

BENNY YAN PIETER SIAHAAN (Indonesia), turning to the report on the issue of human rights and business, said Indonesia was of the view that defining corporate responsibility at the international level would ensure the best possible standards were created. The gap that currently existed between corporate accountability and national norms with regard to labour laws and human rights affecting the local populace would be bridged in a concrete manner by establishing a balance between corporate accountability and national responsibility. Indonesia asked if the Special Representative concurred that creating a global set of administrative standards would effectively determine how corporations and national organs managed their human rights obligations. In Indonesia's view, stakeholders should coordinate efforts to establish policy measures that reflected consistent national practices which protected human rights. At the same time, States should also be allowed to create the policy space they needed to meet their development obligations.

Concerning the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to health, Indonesia was heartened to learn that established human rights non-governmental organizations were now giving more attention than previously to economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to health. That was a positive development that Indonesia hoped it would continue. With regard to the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders, Indonesia had long expressed the view that those rights were just as important to the promotion and protection of human rights as were civil and political rights.

WEGGER STROMMEN (Norway) said, with regard to the mapping exercise undertaken by Mr. Ruggie as a key first step in fulfilling his mandate, that that exercise had benefited substantively from outreach efforts through the holding of several regional multi-stakeholder consultations. The next step was to submit views and recommendations to the Council based on the exercise, and to hold further broad and inclusive consultations in all regions. The mandate should therefore be extended another year. It was important to engage State-owned enterprises in addressing human rights challenges in their spheres of operation.

On the report on human rights defenders, the focus on defenders working in the field of economic, social and cultural rights had been appreciated. Norway was concerned by the situation of defenders working to protect and promote the rights of indigenous peoples, and commended the joint efforts of Ms. Jilani and the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples in sending communications on defenders of indigenous rights to Governments. Norway said it would appreciate the views of the Special Representative on how UN country teams and relevant regional human rights mechanisms could improve their capacity to address that issue.

NICHOLAS THORNE (United Kingdom) said the Global Compact was supposed to bridge the gap between different business sectors and different international standards, and asked whether the Special Representative on human rights and transnational corporations considered it to have been a success. Mr. Ruggie’s report also identified a lag in performance of State-owned companies concerning the adoption of best practice, and the United Kingdom wondered if there were good examples of State-owned enterprises that had adopted voluntary principles or the Global Compact. Also, what constituted complicity in the context of individual responsibility for international crimes and how might that apply to corporations.

AMY LAURENSON (New Zealand) welcomed the report on human rights and health. It was shocking that there was such a great disparity between maternal mortality rates for women in rich countries and women in poor ones. New Zealand would once again like to register its support for all human rights defenders. New Zealand asked what the key issues were for human rights defenders in Zimbabwe at the moment.

CARLOS ALBERTO CHOCANO BURGA (Peru) noted that the Special Rapporteur on the enjoyment of the highest level of health, Paul Hunt, had visited Peru in 2004 and in 2006. During the second visit, he had met with various Governmental actors, representatives of civil society and international organizations. All his recommendations, as well as suggestions and opinions were matters which had been considered, and Peru had started work on various issues.

Some countries, such as Peru, had the right to health enshrined in national policies, and the Special Rapporteur had mentioned the role of civil society in this regard. But there was also a gap between legislation and effective implementation. Nevertheless, progress had been considerable, with comprehensive healthcare extended to victims of social violence and others. Particular care had been given to longer-term illnesses with lesser mortality. These activities had been communicated to the Special Rapporteur, but there were still some pending matters, although Peru was committed to addressing them as soon as possible, to ensure that all its citizens had a better life and level of well being.

MOHAMED LESSIR (Tunisia) said there had been concerted efforts in Tunisia to enshrine the right to health. Budget allocations had increased. There was improved health coverage locally and regionally, improved training of personnel, and a decentralization of the healthcare network aimed at improving efficiency and quality. Mortality rates were down and vaccination and life expectancy up. Health education was also a priority area of action. There were numerous initiatives such as national blood donor day, the anti-diarrhoea campaign, vaccination campaigns, school health days, World Health Day, World No-Smoking Day, anti-AIDS campaigns and other media and awareness-raising campaigns. These activities had been well supported by international non-governmental organizations.

NATHALIE KOHLI (Switzerland) said that with regard to the report on transnational corporations, Switzerland wondered why only a limited number of countries had responded to the questionnaire of the Special Rapporteur. In addition, the Special Rapporteur was asked how the reasonable practice of accountability could be better implemented in the market. In order to make soft laws and mechanisms more efficient, it was important that they were used more in developing countries. The Special Rapporteur was asked whether he had some concrete ideas to improve the participation of those enterprises in such countries. The question was raised how the protection of victims could be improved when the human rights norms were not directly applicable to the enterprises. Finally, Switzerland asked about additional means of dialogue leading to associate enterprises more to their human rights commitments.

Concerning the report of Ms. Jilani, human rights defenders continued to be victims of severe violations of their rights despite some engagements taken at the normative and the operational levels, Switzerland noted. How could human rights defenders who were fighting for economic, social and cultural rights be better protected? The question was raised about what concrete measures, other than that of the video transmission of the work of the Council via the Internet, could the Special Representative propose in order to improve the participation of non-governmental organizations in the work of the Council.

ARTURO CABRERA HIDALGO (Ecuador) said with regards to the work of Mr. Hunt, Ecuador shared the criteria mentioned by the Special Rapporteur in his report, when he said that human rights and health addressed a lot of common ground, and were complementary and mutually reinforcing. The report made the right to health more accessible, practical and effective and was related to specific objectives, such as the Millennium Development Goals. Integrating the right to health into national policy should be a matter the Council should pay great attention to, as well as to policies such as environmental ones, and how these could affect the right to health.

States should comply with this right to the highest level of health. The violation of the right to health could be accomplished through the violation of the right to a clean environment. Mr. Hunt was invited to visit Ecuador and come see the effects of aero-spraying in the northern area of the country near the border, and it was hoped he would carry out his mandate in all impartiality and objectivity in this case, as was usually the case.

SOCORRO ROVIROSA PRIEGO (Mexico) said the report of Mr. Hunt had allowed the issue of the right to health to evolve so as to make it more comprehensible, given its inherent range and complexities. He had particularly brought forward this issue of the obligation of progressive implementation of the right to health. Mexico was pleased to see a growing number of civil society organizations devoted to promoting economic, cultural and social rights and urged them to continue along this path. The Special Rapporteur had described the relevant role of these organizations on the implementation of the right to health and the delegation would welcome comments on good practices in the participation of these organizations on the design and application of public policies oriented to the right to health.

MARGHOOB SALEEM BUTT (Pakistan) said that in view of the increasing role of transnational corporations in an interdependent and globalized world, the relationship between the corporate social responsibility and human rights in terms of better standards of living was very important. Therefore, there was also a need to look at the impact of investments both FDI and domestic, on poverty reduction. The report provided a comprehensive account of the existing limitations of the United Nations treaties which imposed generalized obligations on States to ensure the enjoyment of rights, however, these treaties did not specifically address State duties regarding business.

Another important measure that merited attention was the need to ensure that corporate social responsibility supported, and did not undermine, small-and medium sized enterprise development in developing countries. Transnational corporations should support enterprise development in their host countries. In this regard, the United Nations had an important role in facilitating the development of transnational corporations – small- and medium sized enterprise relations to promote economic prosperity while improving their social and environmental performance.

FATOUMATA DIALL (Mali) said health was like education - one of the major pillars for harmonious development of peoples and countries, and unequal development in this regard was a matter of concern for all. Today, the international community still did not accord the same interest to economic, social and cultural rights as to civil and political rights. However, in Africa, many countries had adopted ambitious healthcare development programmes to ensure that the right to health was effectively enjoyed, and the Government of Mali had adopted two healthcare and social development programmes, with a number of measures including the protection and promotion of the right to health.

These various policies of healthcare development deserved persistent assistance from the development partners, as the right to health was a fundamental right, but one which greatly depended on economic resources.

PAUL KAVANAGH (Ireland) said the work of all three Special Rapporteurs should be commended, and Ireland wished to ask Hina Jilani about how human rights defenders could help to promote economic, cultural and social rights. Her report mentioned national human rights institutions in the protection of these rights. Were there examples of these institutions working at grass roots level? She also mentioned collusion of private security companies in the violation of these rights. What was the role of the international community and Human Rights Council in addressing the complicity of private actors? What mechanisms should be put in place to ensure the work to protect human rights defenders would expand and strengthen in the future?

FOROUZANDEH VADIATI (Iran) said Iran appreciated the presentations made by the three Experts. Concerning the report on health by Mr. Hunt, Iran evoked the sanitary situation in Iraq, asking the Special Rapporteur whether he was worried concerning the occupying authorities. Iran had been a victim of the war with his neighbour and asked the Special Rapporteur to pay more attention to the use of chemical weapons.

SERGEY KONDRATIEV (Russian Federation) said on the report on human rights defenders, in this context, the initiative of Ms. Jilani on the status of human rights defenders was commended, in particular with regards to both categories of rights, namely economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights. The Declaration on the Rights of Human Rights Defenders was gradually becoming a fundamental document in this area, in particular with regards to article 3, when it noted that domestic legislation constituted the legal framework in which human rights and fundamental freedoms should be exercised and ensured, and all the activities in the Declaration should be conducted. The provisions of that article should be taken into account when assessing the situation of human rights.

This was why the Russian Federation could not agree with Ms. Jilani’s definition of the term of human rights defender, as this led to a loss of confidence in the mandate, which was one of the highest in the Council’s mechanisms. The Secretariat provided low quality information about States, and this also reduced the quality of the work of the Special Representative. What were the negative effects which so-called non-State actors had on the activities of human rights defenders, as referred to in Ms. Jilani’s report, Russia asked. It was hoped this comment would be taken into account in the rationalisation of the mandate.

SERGIO ABREU E LIMA FLORENCIO (Brazil) said Professor Ruggie had addressed an issue of immense complexity. Brazil was concerned about the assessment that companies from developing countries were exactly those most underrepresented in the mapping of international standards. The capacity of the United Nations system to deal with the issue of corporate standards of responsibility and accountability was limited. There was insufficient awareness among enterprises. Many Brazilian enterprises were engaged in the Global Compact, and there were promising examples. Some toy manufacturers used a seal saying “child-friendly company” to show these companies did not have child labour. But these were quite limited results and he hoped they would be broader.

Addressing the right to health, Brazil appreciated Mr. Hunt’s innovative views and the bridges he tried to build between health and human rights issues. Maternal mortality figures were striking: half a million maternal deaths each year, 90 percent of them in Africa and Asia. Mr. Hunt’s message on this was very strong. Brazil believed that it would be very useful to look at health issues like this from a human rights perspective.

MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh) said that Bangladesh wanted to comment on the report of Ms. Jilani on human rights defenders. It was a pity that only few human rights defenders represented at the Council were speaking of economic, social and cultural rights. A society could not progress without the rights to housing and food, among others. Without education, awareness could not be created. Bangladesh had a vibrant civil society and a long tradition of working with non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Some 40,000 NGOs were registered in the country. The NGOs in Bangladesh were working hand in hand with the Government. Most of the work was in the social sector. A broad balance of NGOs from the South should be present at the Council as well. With regard to the report on transnational corporations, Bangladesh said that much progress had been made but much more remained to be done. Violations of human rights by those corporations were widespread. If they were not tackled, the benefits of globalization would go away. Bangladesh supported the idea of a regular monitoring instrument in this regard.

PHEAK KDEY KEO (Cambodia) said with regards to the report on human rights defenders, there was concern that in the chapter on activities of the mandate holder during the period of review, the report did not illustrate close cooperation with the concerned countries. The Special Rapporteur should monitor and value the information received from concerned countries. In some issues, the reports from non-governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society and local human rights defenders were not transparent.

The attention of the Special Rapporteur was drawn to the fact that the Government of Cambodia had never prevented the access of human rights defenders to monitor the moving of Bassac residents in Phnom Penh as stated in the report, as NGOs, civil society, and human rights activists in Cambodia could operate freely in the Kingdom.

MICHEL DOUCIN (France) said France was interested in a different type of approach to voluntary standards in Corporate Social Responsibility. National and transnational corporations bribed weak States to relocate so as to circumvent national laws. National laws were often derived from universal laws. Corporations were able to circumvent these laws. The definition of voluntary Corporate Social Responsibility was not upheld and the concept of voluntarism was ambiguous. Transnational companies were able to select freely from a vast array of international, non-binding norms and this was alarming.

Another issue was the matter of Corporate Social Responsibility commitments in relation to certain branches of industry and certain types of risk. Behind certain voluntary principles developed by big industry, there was the hidden collaboration of States, pulling strings of a token voluntarism so as to protect their own economic interests. There was a growing role for banks and consumers in the issue of voluntary principles.

France asked whether the Special Rapporteur should identify gross violations of human rights that some companies were guilty of. This would enable the best instruments to be developed. France suggested this would also promote an awareness of victims of these violations.

NADIA STUENER (Canada) said that Canada strongly supported the mandate of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders. The report reminded that many prominent human rights defenders across the globe themselves remained seriously vulnerable to abuses. Civil society engagement, particularly from groups focusing on the protection and promotion of human rights, had been critical to ensuring effective government responses to HIV/AIDS. Canada noted with concern the many challenges faced by human rights defenders who defended the rights of those living with HIV/AIDS and worked to combat HIV/AIDS in countries such as China, Jamaica and Myanmar. The question was raised how this Council, its members and observer States could best support the work of the United Nations and the Special Representative to seek improvements in the situation for human rights defenders in these and other countries.

Canada also thanked the Special Rapporteur on the right to health for his work in the realization of his mandate. Canada would be interested in the Special Rapporteur’s findings in Uganda and elsewhere on the challenges faced by children infected and affected by HIV, particularly their enjoyment to the right to the highest attainable standard of health. Canada asked whether the Special Rapporteur considered addressing this issue in future reports. With regard to the report on transnational corporations, Canada applauded the transparent approach adopted by the Special Representative. While substantial progress had been made, business responsibilities vis-à-vis the protection of human rights remained an underdeveloped area of corporate social responsibility. Canada asked if the Special Representative could elaborate on the variety of measures to be taken by States with respect to the protection of human rights by non-state actors, including non-judicial and non-legal measures.

CHANTAL NAMA (Cameroon) said by adhering in 1984 to the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Cameroon had committed itself to improving the life of its population. That commitment had led it to adopt measures to strengthen the economic capacity in order to increase the resources dedicated to certain sectors, such as health. In this regard, a sectoral strategy had been adopted, emphasising the fight against pandemics such as malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS.

Despite limited resources, Cameroon was determined to continue its efforts on health in general, and on the health of the mother and child in particular. However, although considerable progress had been achieved, difficulties remained. Thus, despite the political will of the authorities, the right of every person to enjoy the highest attainable level of physical and mental health was not always ensured in an optimal manner. Only international solidarity would make it possible to achieve effectively the right to health.

BART OUVRY (Belgium) said Mr. Hunt had collaborated with numerous United Nations bodies and Belgium encouraged this further in pursuit of a “mainstreaming” of the health and human rights issue. Belgium asked if Mr. Hunt anticipated even more strengthened cooperation with treaty bodies and to what extent, and what obstacles and opportunities existed in this regard. The report had mentioned sexual orientation as a factor in discrimination over access to health. More comments were requested on the outcome of the Sweden visit and on the measures needed at the State level to counter psychosocial discrimination against persons with different sexual orientation.

Belgium also noted that it fully supported Mr. Ruggie’s efforts. He had consulted various organizations during his study; could he say which were the ones with whom the issue could better be furthered and what would be the role of the mandate and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in this respect? Mr. Ruggie had underlined the cooperation between different parties, including States and civil society; was this a sector that could be developed for guidelines on good practices?

WARREN W. TICHENOR (United States) thanked Mr. Ruggie for his report. The United States remained committed to promoting voluntary corporate social responsibility initiatives in a variety of sectors throughout the world. The United States was also mindful of the need to rigorously examine the scope of existing obligations under human rights treaties and would be sending the Representative a letter to follow up these legal matters. Concerning the report of Ms. Jilani, the United States stated that men and women worldwide were daily seeking to lay claim to basic freedoms of association, speech, worship and assembly. Governments were passing or selectively applying laws and regulations against non-governmental organizations, independent media and human rights defenders.

In cases such as Zimbabwe and Uzbekistan, human rights and other activists for democracy who criticized the Government were subject to harassment, arbitrary arrest, politically motivated prosecution, and physical attack. The United States recognized the need to defend the defenders. It was committed to speaking out against restrictions on civil society, and had pledged to support defenders under siege. The United States urged their partners in the international democratic community to join them in these commitments to stand with courageous defenders of human rights and democracy, while calling to account the Governments that sought to undermine them.

ABDULNOMEN ANNAN (Syria) said Mr. Hunt had handled the issue of the right to health in an upright manner, and was forthright with regards to the sanctions in terms of health imposed on the Palestinian people, mentioning the great burden shouldered by Syria with regards to refugees. Currently, Syria was hosting a vast number of Iraqi refugees, treating them as honoured guests, providing humanitarian assistance on an urgent basis. This great number of refugees was a burden on life in general in Syria, where the health sector could not deal with the vast number. Schools in Syria were also overburdened because of the number of pupils.

Syria had been shouldering this burden because it understood the gravity of the humanitarian tragedy suffered in Iraq, whereas the United States was refusing to take the burden by refusing even one Iraqi refugee, even though it was behind the humanitarian crisis due to its illegitimate invasion of Iraq and the destruction of that country. The international community should address in a constructive manner the economic, social and cultural needs of the Iraqi people in diaspora, including in Syria.

RAFAEL GARCIA COLLADA (Cuba) said Cuba had few resources and was a developing country living under an embargo, yet almost 30,000 Cuban health professionals had been working in Latin America and the Caribbean, Africa and Asia. Cuba had established disaster response mechanisms after several hurricanes, providing specialist services free of charge. Guatemala, Pakistan and Bolivia had all benefited. Cooperation between Venezuela and Cuba to tackle an opthalmological infection problem had benefited tens of thousands of people. Cuba concurred on the negative impact of migration of health workers to the North. The Bush plan to annex Cuba approved in 2004 included policies and programmes to steal Cuban health professionals helping people around the world.

Mr. Ruggie had revealed the unscrupulous practices of transnational corporations in many areas: drug pricing, resource grabbing, contracts with private military and security companies, labour exploitation and others. This showed that the promotion and protection of human rights must be defended by the establishment of regulations on corporate social responsibility.

Concluding Remarks by Experts on Right to Health, Human Rights Defenders

PAUL HUNT, Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, said that he warmly thanked all those who commented on his report. He wanted to reply to the delegate of Sweden. He looked forward to continuing a dialogue with the Government of Sweden and engaging in a discussion. Concerning the remarks of Peru, the Special Rapporteur thanked Peru for it. He would reply as soon as possible to the remarks sent to him by the country.

With regard to New Zealand, the Special Rapporteur said that there was new partnership established for maternal mortality in the World Health Organization. This partnership should be encouraged by incorporating human rights in their work. In addition, an event on maternal mortality was going to take place. On the question on what the Human Rights Council could do with regards to 500,000 women dying while giving birth, he asked whether the Human Rights Council could organize a special session on the issue of maternal mortality as a human rights issue.

Turning to other points raised, the Special Rapporteur thanked Ecuador for the invitation to visit the country. The Special Rapporteur would respond as soon as possible to the country. He appreciated Ecuador for approaching him on this matter. Concerning Canada’s question on HIV/AIDS and children, he was actively planning a country visit on HIV/AIDS. It was not going to take place in Uganda but in another country, where discussions were still taking place.

HINA JILANI, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders, said with regards to the Government of Brazil, she thanked them for the information on developments, which were relevant to the recommendations she had made, and deeply appreciated the Government’s openness in establishing contact with non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and encouraged the Government to ensure this was also open to NGOs working in the field of economic, social and cultural rights, particularly those involved in large projects such as environmental issues that affected the population in general. The legal framework at the national level for the justicability and enforcement of economic, social and cultural rights was a matter of concern globally, and made human rights defenders more vulnerable, as it did not provide adequate redress for them.


On the question on the protection of the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, attention should be drawn to certain changes in certain countries, where the criminalisation of such sexual activity had been in many ways changed through legislation, and such steps would go a long way in allowing human rights defenders to put forward their interventions for protecting persons in these categories. The international community should promote the understanding of article 7 of the Declaration on the Rights of Human Rights Defenders on economic, social and cultural rights, as this said that everyone had the right to develop and discuss new human rights ideas and principles and advocate their acceptance.

On non-state actors and the collusion between national and local authorities, Ms. Jilani had benefited greatly from the report of Mr. Ruggie in this regard, in particular with regards to the accountability framework that could be used to manage this issue. The number of non-State actors who were added to the list of perpetrators was increasing. National human rights institutions were already playing a role in increasing the capacity of human rights defenders to defend economic, social and cultural rights due to various activities. There were several initiatives that they were taking in this respect. Article 3 of the Declaration was also particularly significant, but it should be read in concert with article 4.

For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC07028E