HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL DISCUSSES INTEGRATION OF GENDER PERSPECTIVE IN ITS WORK PROGRAMME

The Human Rights Council this afternoon discussed mainstreaming the gender perspective in the work of the Human Rights Council, a debate aimed at building a platform for the long-term process of integration of the issue in the Council’s work programme.

Maria Nzomo, Permanent Representative of Kenya to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Moderator of the panel discussion, said despite gender and gender mainstreaming being an old concept, sometimes it was misunderstood. Gender was not about women - it was about social relations between men and women, boys and girls, indeed entire humanity. The Council should systematically integrate a gender perspective into all its work, the mandate holders, Special Procedures and other elements of the institution-building process. The Council already had a mandate to address this issue: the General Assembly had called on the Council to integrate attention to gender perspectives into its consideration of all issues in its respective agenda, including the development of its methods of work.

Kyung–wha Kang, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that integrating women’s rights and the gender dimension into the work of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) was a key priority for the High Commissioner and OHCHR. This was particularly important as the Council finalized its institution-building exercise and embarked upon its next phase with much promise for strengthening the universality of human rights. With a new unit on women’s rights and gender issues, OHCHR greatly looked forward to assisting in this endeavour. The purpose of today’s discussion was not to address the human rights of women and gender-related violations but the process and approach.

Radhika Coomaraswamy, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict, said it was clear that normative frameworks of protection of women’s rights had to be succeeded by a monitoring phase. It was also time for implementation; time to translate realities in daily life into real change on the ground. Other areas of concern had to be brought into the picture too: women and girls in armed conflict situations; improved economic and social rights of women; and greater recognition of reproductive rights. In the women’s agenda it was time to move beyond promises and turn to action.

Miloon Kothari, Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, said applying gender perspectives meant making a particular examination of situations where women, girls, men or boys experienced specific issues with respect to the enjoyment of their human rights on the basis of gender. Gender perspectives were critical for a comprehensive understanding of the right to adequate housing and land. The insights that he and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women had gained with respect to economic and social policies and their impact on violence against women underscored, in particular, that women’s poverty, together with a lack of alternative housing options, made it difficult for women to leave violent family situations, and reaffirmed that forced relocation and forced eviction from home and land had a disproportionately severe impact on women, and made them more vulnerable to violence.

Charlotte Bunch, Founder and Executive Director of the Centre for Women’s Global Leadership, said nothing could be more urgent than improving women’s access to human rights at the local level. The persistence of gross violations of women’s rights was shockingly visible in the world today, and the lack of remedies for most of the women and girls facing them posed a challenge to all. The Human Rights Council, as the United Nations’ premier human rights body, was in an unparalleled position to address this both by building on the previous success of addressing gender and women’s experience within the Commission, and by continuing to rectify a history of shortcomings regarding gender as well.

In the general debate following the panellists’ statements, delegates raised numerous points. They welcomed the discussion on how gender issues could be reflected in the Universal Periodic Review process. They said the Council and its mechanisms should pay more attention to women human rights defenders, and should ensure that the United Nations as a whole continued to include gender-mainstreaming in all programmes and operations. Novel, pro-active strategies to promote gender equality in the economic and social spheres should be developed. A need for specific provisions on gender in resolutions was identified. There were questions on how Special Procedures might systematise gender perspectives in their work, and how progress in gender equality issues might be monitored in the reporting for the Universal Periodic Review process.

At the beginning of the meeting, the Council heard a statement by Abdulla Shahid, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Maldives. He highlighted the issue of climate change and how low-lying States like the Maldives were at severe risk. Global warming would have an impact on human rights – rights to self-determination, to life, to water, to cultural life, to property, to health and others were directly implicated. The Maldives called on the Human Rights Council to convene a debate on human rights and climate change during 2008.

The Council heard Israel, Palestine and Egypt speak in right of reply in relation to the morning discussion on the human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories.

Speaking in the interactive debate were the representatives of Slovenia, New Zealand on behalf of Norway, Sweden, Philippines, Morocco, Portugal on behalf of the European Union, Tunisia, Chile, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Turkey, Mexico and Canada.

Also speaking were representatives of International Federation of University Women, speaking on behalf of several NGOs1, and International Women's Rights Action Watch, on behalf of International Movement against all Forms of Discrimination and Racism; Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development; and Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development.


The Human Rights Council will meet at 10 a.m. on Friday, 21 September to conclude its debate on gender mainstreaming.


Statement by Foreign Minister of the Maldives

ABDULLA SHAHID, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Maldives, said the Maldives had enjoyed rapid economic growth and social development over the past two decades. The Government was engaged in a sweeping programme of constitutional and democratic reform to guarantee full and effective protection of human rights. The momentum behind the reform was unstoppable. The August referendum on choosing between a parliamentary or presidential form of Government had represented a major step forward towards the completion of the revised Constitution. Voter turnout had been high. Foreign relations, notably those with international organizations, donor States and non-governmental organizations,
had a vital supporting role to play in helping the Maldives complete the reform programme and bolster respect for human rights. The Maldives had engaged in the reform agenda through the ratification of core Covenants, invitations to Special Procedures, and appointment of a national human rights adviser. The Government would sign the Declaration on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities next month.

Mr. Shahid highlighted the issue of climate change: low-lying States like the Maldives were at severe risk. The UN Security Council-sponsored debate on climate change was a bold step, but it was time to put words into deeds. Global warming would have an impact on human rights – rights to self-determination, to life, to water, to cultural life, to property, to health and others were directly implicated. It was imperative not to lose sight of the human rights implications of global warming. The Maldives called on the Human Rights Council to convene a debate on human rights and climate change during 2008.

Introductory Statements to Panel Discussion on Mainstreaming a Gender Perspective in the Work of the Human Rights Council

MARIA NZOMO, Permanent Representative of Kenya to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Moderator of the Panel Discussion, said despite gender and gender mainstreaming being an old concept, sometimes it was misunderstood. Gender was not about women - it was about social relations between men and women, boys and girls, indeed entire humanity. It was a fundamental core of the work of the Human Rights Council. Today, there would be no focus mainly on issues of gender as it related to specifics of violations or other definite concerns, but rather on how to begin to hold a discussion on how to move forward on this issue, on how to address it. There was no lacking of commitment at the legal level. The Council, being in the early stages of developing its work, should examine how it could integrate gender concerns and the rights of all in a manner that was equitable and just.

Gender was not about women, but there was a relationship between gender integration and the human rights of women. The Council should systematically integrate a gender perspective into all its work, the mandate holders, procedures, Special Procedures and other elements of the institution-building process. The Council already had a mandate to address this issue: the General Assembly had called on the Council to integrate attention to gender perspectives into its consideration of all issues in its respective agenda, including the development of its methods of work.

KYUNG-WHA KANG, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that integrating women’s rights and the gender dimension into the work of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) was a key priority for the High Commissioner and OHCHR. This was particularly important as the Council finalized its institution-building exercise and embarked upon its next phase with much promise for strengthening the universality of human rights. With a new unit on women’s rights and gender issues, OHCHR greatly looked forward to assisting in this endeavour.

The purpose of today’s discussion, Ms. Kang said, was not to address the human rights of women and gender-related violations but the process and approach. The term gender referred to the socially constructed roles between women and men and the social differences that were learned. Despite progress made in achieving gender equality, women continued to be amongst the poorest and most marginalized segments of the population throughout the world. Gender equality referred to the equal enjoyment by women and men of rights, opportunities, resources and rewards.

A decade after its formal introduction by the Economic and Social Council, the gender mainstreaming strategy remained largely on paper, superficially understood and ineffectually implemented, Ms. Kang said. In order to aim for results, the work needed to go along a two-track approach for the UN system: redoubling the mainstreaming effort throughout the system and rallying around the entities in the system in charge of gender issues. Much expectation was put in the establishment of an enhanced, consolidated gender architecture that was taking shape at UN Headquarters. The Human Rights Council needed to incorporate gender analysis throughout its work. Also, promoting and strengthening legal frameworks that clearly prescribed gender equality was believed to be a key task for the Council.

RADHIKA COOMARASWAMY, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict, said the issue of gender needed mainstreaming into the whole system, but also needed special, detailed focus. The old Human Rights Commission had dealt with the issue under the mandate of violence against women. The issue had since been studied throughout the world and was seen as an example of how grass roots women’s movements brought their issues to the United Nations under the framework of violence against women with successful results. Effective pressure on a number of gender issues had been brought to bear, and legislation improved as a result.

In reviewing progress, it was now clear, firstly, that normative frameworks had to be succeeded by a monitoring phase. It was also time for implementation, time to translate realities in daily life into real change on the ground. Secondly, other areas of concern had to be brought into the picture. Among them were the issue of the girl child, such as those who were victims in armed conflict situations; improved economic and social rights of women; and greater recognition of reproductive rights. In the women’s agenda it was time to move beyond promises and begin to bring about change to the everyday lives of women.

MILOON KOTHARI, Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, said his fellow Special Procedure mandate holders and he attached great importance to integrating gender perspectives into the work of the Council. Several resolutions of the former Commission called on Special Procedures in general to ensure gender perspectives were fully integrated into their work. Some thematic mandates had been specifically tasked with integrating gender perspectives into their work. Applying gender perspectives did not simply imply focusing on women and girls, but rather to particularly examine situations where women, girls, men or boys experienced specific issues with respect to the enjoyment of their human rights on the basis of gender. Several mandates had taken important initiatives to integrate gender perspectives into their work.

In applying his own mandate, Mr. Kothari said, he had found that applying gender perspectives was critical for a comprehensive understanding of the right to adequate housing and land. The insights that he and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women had gained with respect to economic and social policies and their impact on violence against women underscored, in particular, that women’s poverty, together with a lack of alternative housing options, made it difficult for women to leave violent family situations, and reaffirmed that forced relocation and forced eviction from home and land had a disproportionately severe impact on women, and made them more vulnerable to violence.

Concerning the review of mandates, this was an important occasion to highlight the gender aspects of human rights violations, and assess the degree to which mandates had taken up these issues. As the Council considered the overall system of Special Procedures, and identified protection gaps, it should be noted that full consideration of the gender aspects of human rights violations was a serious protection gap. The work of the Council to identify protection gaps should include gender analysis to ensure more comprehensive treatment of this issue in future.

CHARLOTTE BUNCH, Executive Director, Center for Women’s Global Leadership of Rutgers University, New Jersey, said this was not an academic exercise. Gender integration into human rights work could have a significant impact on the life and death of women and girls everyday in every part of the world. Nothing could be more urgent than improving women’s access to human rights at the local level, as could be seen from the many reports of atrocities that women still suffered in conflicts and in daily life in all too many places. The effort to achieve universal access to the enjoyment of human rights by all required a consideration of the diversity of experiences that made up our lives.

Ms. Bunch said the persistence of gross violations of women’s rights was shockingly visible in the world today, and the lack of remedies for most of the women and girls facing them posed a challenge to all. The Human Rights Council, as the United Nations’ premier human rights body, was in an unparalleled position to address this both by building on the previous success of addressing gender and women’s experience within the Commission, and by continuing to rectify a history of shortcomings regarding gender as well.

A gender perspective in the work of the Special Procedures had included creation of women-specific mandates such as the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, but also the integration of women’s experience in relation to country and thematic reporting of procedures. Rapporteurs should integrate work on gender by exploring how the particular theme of their work affected women specifically, and should engage in research and investigation that facilitated this goal, including visits with a range of women’s organizations. Reviews, rationalisation and improvement of mandates should encourage discussion of the human rights of women, and should identify areas of gaps and overlaps in order to strengthen protections against gender-related violations.

Discussion

ANDREJ LOGAR (Slovenia) recalled that the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action signalled that the equal status and human rights of women should be integrated into the mainstream of UN system-wide activities. Slovenia fully supported the work of the Women’s Rights and Gender Unit. While it was important to fully address gender integration in the ongoing process of review of Special Procedures’ mandates, gender integration into the long-term work of the mandate holders had to be ensured. How could the gender perspective be systematically integrated into the long-term work of Special Procedures? How would it be ensured that all gender protection gaps would be sufficiently covered?

DON MACKAY (New Zealand), speaking also on behalf of Norway, said New Zealand and Norway commended the majority of Special Rapporteurs on the integration of gender into their work. The perspective should be evident in all Special Procedures and not only those concerned with women’s rights. New Zealand and Norway also welcomed discussion on how gender issues could be reflected in the Universal Periodic Review process, such as in consultation with non-governmental organizations and interest groups, sex-aggregated data, and normative frameworks on States’ efforts to ensure women’s representations in decision-making roles. New Zealand and Norway requested practical advice on tabling resolutions and initiatives with reference to their impact on men, women, boys and girls.

HANS DAHLGREN (Sweden) said promoting gender equality and women’s rights through mainstreaming and integrating gender perspectives throughout the work of the Council continued to be of prime importance. The important work done by the Commission and by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women to protect and promote women’s rights had had an impact, and the Council should reinforce these efforts, accelerating progress in the field of gender mainstreaming, including in the Universal Periodic Review. Gender issues should also be highlighted through specific agenda issues. The Council and its mechanisms should pay more attention to women human rights defenders, and should ensure that the United Nations as a whole continued to include gender-mainstreaming in all programmes and operations. In a question to Ms. Koomeraswamy, Sweden asked what she thought the Council could do to raise the issue as part of conflict prevention.

ERLINDA F. BASILIO (Philippines) said that while striving for gender balance, the Council should also seek that relevant mandate holders had the best experience possible. More had to be done to address the issue of sexual exploitation of girls. The feminisation of poverty should be avoided. In which mandates should the Council make the relevant work to tackle the gender issue?

MOHAMMED LOULICHKI (Morocco) said gender integration was a long-term effort, and results should be strengthened and consolidated. The Council should coordinate with other agencies to ensure gender integration. The issue had been incorporated into the Universal Periodic Review and streamlining and improvement of mandates under Special Procedures should also strive to integrate the gender perspective. It was important to have specific provisions on gender in resolutions. Morocco asked whether there could be guidelines to help States in their efforts to integrate the gender perspective, and on operationalization.

CARLA CASTELO (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the gender perspective needed to be integrated into the Council’s work in a systematic and meaningful manner. Gender mainstreaming/integration was by its truly inter-related nature permeating all human rights topics, and it was thus distinct from women’s substantive rights, also to be addressed by the Council in its future work. Both substantive human rights of women and the institutional gender integration approach deserved specific and regular slots in the Council’s work. The Council needed to operationalise effectively the principle of gender perspective into its substantive work, in particular in the process of review and work of the Special Procedures and the Universal Periodic Review.

Among questions asked by the European Union were: how could the Council systematically and most effectively conduct a regular and effective assessment of the gender integration in its work; how could the Special Procedures better systematise gender perspectives in the conduct of their work; how to best approach the systematisation of gender perspectives in the assessment-review of the Special Procedures during the current Council’s cycle; and whether there were specific issues that could be included in Universal Periodic Review reporting that could indicate the level of equality achieved in practice.

SAMIR LABIDI (Tunisia) said that Tunisia attached much importance to the question of gender equality. The Human Rights Council was also the proper forum for the promotion of gender equality and it had to carry out greater efforts. A consistent process to introduce gender issues into all activities and all decision procedures should be implemented. The international community was today agreeing to the importance of promotion of equality to achieve a balanced society. Equality of women was enshrined in the Tunisian Constitution. Various components of the Tunisian society had taken steps to further parity.

JUAN MARTABIT (Chile) said Chile had presented a draft resolution on the integration of the gender perspective. Chile hoped the dialogue would produce concrete applications. It was imperative to evaluate implications across both genders, and to ensure the process was effective across the United Nations as a whole. The draft resolution contained paragraphs aimed at reaffirming the Council’s commitment to gender equality.

TEHMINA JANJUA (Pakistan), speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said gender mainstreaming, as it was a long-term process, required the constant attention and commitment of the Council. Some progress had been made since the Beijing Conference. There was a need for gender mainstreaming in all human resources development policies, including programmes design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Mainstreaming also required a gender-balanced Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Secretariat, with the broadest participation of women at all levels of decision making.

Human rights issues that disproportionately affected women and girls should be fully addressed by the Human Rights Council. The institution-building package recognised gender balance among the principles for the agenda and programme of work, and stressed the importance of having a gender balance in the sub-structures of the Council. Governments should make a deliberate effort to present women candidates for the Human Rights Council’s Advisory Committee and the Consultative Committee. The database to be developed for Special Procedures should have more women candidates.

CONCHITA PONCINI, of International Federation of University Women, speaking on behalf of several NGOs1, said that there was a dearth of information on national legislation and practices that had gender based discrimination because of the use of wrong terminologies or simple manipulation of language. A gender equal perspective in the Universal Periodic Review should be scrupulously respected by a systemic method of gathering and reviewing data and information disaggregated by sex and age. It was not enough to have a gender balance composition in the Special Procedures, Expert Advisory Services or the Universal Periodic Review and Complaints Procedure. Technical gender awareness and sensitivity training had to be provided to mandate holders.

SUNILA ABEYSEKERA, of International Women's Rights Action Watch, on behalf of International Movement against all Forms of Discrimination and Racism; Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development; and Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development, said institutional commitments for mainstreaming a gender perspective from the Council, Member States and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights were needed. Integration should follow the rights-based framework of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, which contained principles of substantive equality and non-discrimination. The perspective should be reflected in the proposed Universal Periodic Review structure, including suitable expertise in reviewing teams.

KYUNG-WHA KANG, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, responding to the questions and comments made, said there was apparently a perception that after 25 years of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), as far as laws were concerned, there was success, but these needed to be examined with regards to the situation of implementation and whether women were getting the rights they were entitled to through laws and statutes - and if not, what were their recourses. It was the poorest and more marginalized women who were the most cut off with regards to access to justice. This aspect had to be more carefully examined.

There were also explicit elements of discrimination that continued to remain in many laws that were implemented. The legal set-up needed to be given greater focus. In this regard, the Human Rights Council could set up various kinds of machinery such as an Expert Group, and legal/institutional arrangements could be examined further for gender arrangements. On how the Council could conduct gender integration, this was a broad question, and had to do with the process, i.e. keeping the gender item constantly and routinely in the work of the Council, but also to do with the produce, i.e. what came of the work of the Council, and this included dealing with discriminatory laws.

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ new body worked closely with the Department for the Advancement of Women, and participated in inter-agency set-ups that dealt with women’s issues. There should be seamless servicing for CEDAW when it moved to Geneva in 2008.

RADHIKA COOMARASWAMY, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict, answering the first questions, said with regard to multiple forms of discrimination, the socio-economic cultural rights of women should also be taken into account. Provisions for women and children were being implemented in war recovering regions.

Miloon Kothari, Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, responding, said the first step on integrating the issue of gender mainstreaming into Special Procedures would be for the resolutions governing the mandates to have more specific provisions – specific studies, tasks, standard-setting etc. On monitoring, he said that during visits, there had been initiatives such as separately interviewing men and women.

CHARLOTTE BUNCH, Founder and Executive Director of the Centre for Women’s Global Leadership, responding to the questions and comments made earlier, said with regards to the comments made by the non-governmental organizations, the first point on gender integration and the relationship to women-specific programmes was very important, and was the basis of the work many were doing on gender-equality architecture. Women-specific programming was essential to drive gender-specific architecture. On indicators and accountability, there was a need to examine the Universal Periodic Review to systematise some indicators and guidelines for what could be seen as determining the success of gender integration. There was the material to establish these guidelines.

TUGBA ETENSEL (Turkey) said that gender equality issues should be put at the centre of policy planning. The Human Rights Council should play a leading role in the mainstreaming strategy. The Council should develop a strategy in accordance with its own working methods. The Universal Periodic Review would be a good tool to revise the States’ legislation to protect gender equality.

MABEL GOMEZ OLIVER (Mexico) said the Mexican delegation was still convinced of the usefulness of the exchange on this subject. Proposals would have to be thought out carefully, and it would be essential to make sure each State included a gender perspective. Focus on legislation first and foremost was crucial, and the Universal Periodic Review should consider to what extent frameworks guaranteed rights of women in the letter and spirit and application of the law. Migrants and indigenous peoples were other subjects where a gender perspective would be useful. States needed to make special efforts to provide a gender perspective in the information submitted under the Universal Periodic Review. Novel, pro-active strategies to promote gender equality in the economic and social spheres should be developed.

NADIA STUEWER (Canada) said this discussion was the first in a series of steps necessary to strengthen the integration of the gender perspectives into the work of the Council. It was important to integrate a gender perspective into the Universal Periodic Review process, and States should report thoroughly on the gender perspectives, and include gender perspectives in all matters under review. How could States ensure that the gender perspective would be integrated into the Universal Periodic Review, the speaker wondered, also asking how to ensure that all protection gaps were covered through the work of the Special Procedures. Canada appealed for the Council to evaluate its own work, and try to make equality among men and women a major point therein. Time should be allocated for an annual debate to examine the progress made by the Council in this regard. At least one day every year should be reserved for the debate on the rights of women, including States and other interested parties.


Right of Reply

ITZHAK LEVANON (Israel), speaking in a right of reply, said with regards to the freedom of worship and access in Jerusalem, Israel had always been committed to the safeguarding of sites which had cultural, religious or historical significance. Israel was waiting for the day when the Palestinians and the Arab States would have the courage to adopt a law to protect all holy places in their midst, as Israel had done more than 40 years ago. Regarding Reverend Tutu, he did not need to the permission of Israel to go to Beit Hanoun - the latter was in the Palestinian Territories, under the control of the Hamas terrorists. Anyone could, and still could go to Beit Hanoun through the Egyptian border. Reverend Tutu was offered this possibility but declined it for personal reasons.

As for the Israeli Cabinet’s decision to declare Gaza a hostile territory: every Israeli action was subject to humanitarian considerations, and Israel was committed as ever to abide by its humanitarian obligations. But no country in the world would consent to maintain normal commercial and economic relations with a territory controlled by a terrorist entity which regularly shelled and indiscriminately targeted innocent civilians in a neighbouring State.

MOHAMMED ABU-KOASH (Palestine), speaking in a right of reply, said the Beit Hanoun Mission had not been able to visit the area. The reasons had been made clear. Had the visit been approved, there would have been a letter to this effect. Concerning the holy places, he said Palestine and the Palestinian people respected all three religions present in the area. Israeli practices against the Palestinian faithful had been reflected in Israeli newspapers. Had Israel forgotten the Al-Aqsa mosque? The incursions in Jerusalem?

AMR ROSHDY (Egypt) referring to the letter send by Archbishop Desmond Tutu about his inability to carry out the Mission to Beit Hanoun, said Egypt wished formally, through the President, to know the reasons for which this Mission could not be carried out.

DORU ROMULUS COSTEA, President of the Human Rights Council, said that Archbishop Desmond Tutu had in his first letter referred to the refusal of the Israeli authorities to authorize his access to the territory. At a later stage, he said that because of previous commitments, the members of the Mission had not been able to carry out the Mission before the present session of the Council.

1Joint statement on behalf of: International Federation of University Women; Pan Pacific and South East Asia Women's Association; Women's International Zionist Organization; Women's Federation for World Peace International; Worldwide Organization for Women; Anglican Consultative Council; Women's International League for Peace and Freedom; International Federation of Business and Professional women; Movement against Racism and for Friendship among Peoples; International Council of Women; United Towns Agency For North-South Cooperation; Zonta International; and Women's World Summit Foundation.

For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC07061E