HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS GENERAL DEBATE

The Human Rights Council this afternoon held a general debate, speaking about different topics, including the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the work of the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, the upcoming first round of the Universal Periodic Review, the defense and promotion of human rights around the world, the consolidation of the Human Rights Council and the rising problem of Islamophobia.

The Arab Group, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and others strongly condemned recent Israeli attacks on Palestinian civilians which left dozens killed, and underscored that despite numerous resolutions by the Council and other United Nations bodies urging Israel to stop its violations, none of them had been implemented because of the impunity enjoyed by Israel.

On the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, some speakers said that there was a need for more engagement to discuss how the Human Rights Council and the Office of the High Commissioner should relate to each other more effectively and cohesively. Others said the Office of the High Commissioner needed sufficient leeway in order to fulfil its role.

With regards to the Universal Periodic Review, delegates said this tool should be genuinely universal and should steer clear of double standards, selectivity and politicization. The review would also be a crucial step to engage in constructive engagement and dialogue to advance the causes of human rights. At the same time, and on consolidation of the Council, Members of the Council should guard against past mistakes, including short-term narrow pyrrhic gains, and should promote dialogue and cooperation instead.

On Islamophobia and freedom of expression, some speakers said respect for freedom of opinion and expression was crucial for building a tolerant society. Full exercise of the right to free speech was what gave voice to all other rights. Few principles were as central to democracy as the ability to speak one’s own thoughts and opinions freely. Others underlined that the phenomenon of defamation of religions and Islamophobia were becoming more frequent and dangerous, citing the reprinting of blasphemous cartoons.

Climate change, eliminating all forms of discrimination, the upcoming sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the rights of refugees and migrants, and the independence of the Special Procedures were other issues which were raised by speakers.

Speaking in the general debate were the Representatives of Palestine (on behalf of the Arab Group), Pakistan (on behalf of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference), Pakistan, Uruguay, South Africa, China, Mexico, Bangladesh, Qatar, Malaysia, Azerbaijan, the Russian Federation, Canada, Peru, Jordan, Singapore, the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, Bhutan, Oman, Thailand, Greece, the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees, Australia, Albania, New Zealand, Bahrain, Iceland, the United States, Libya, Algeria, the Holy See and the United Arab Emirates.

The next meeting of the Human Rights Council will be on Thursday, 6 March at 10 a.m., when it is scheduled to conclude the general debate and address the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

General Debate

MOHAMMAD ABU-KOASH (Palestine), speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, said the Arab Group hoped that they would be able to select the remaining Special Rapporteurs in the current session and to conclude all pending elements for the Universal Periodic Review. Objective discussion, constructive cooperation and equality of treatment needed to be respected during the Universal Periodic Review. At a time when the world was working to create bridges through the dialogue among civilizations, there were campaigns against Arab social and cultural beliefs which were leading to a collision of civilizations and not cooperation. All religions called for love and rejection of instigation and violence, and the Council should play a role in ensuring that religious symbols were not the victim of derision from certain media. There should be awareness raising strategies for the respect of religions. It was imperative to review the work of the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights in order to avoid selectivity and politicization. There were some shortcomings in the work of the Office vis-à-vis certain countries, particularly Palestine. The Council had the responsibility to express its opinion on the working strategy of the Office. The Arab Group felt concerned about the geographic imbalance of representation within the Office.

A rabid campaign against Sudan was going on because of the situation in Darfur, although the Sudanese Government was working hard to treat the situation there and was cooperating with the Council on this. Israel continued to occupy Palestine, the Golan Heights and other Arab territories. Israel had not implemented any of the United Nations resolutions and continued to violate international laws. The question of Palestine was of central importance for Arab and Muslim people. This would continue to be the hotspot and the reason for animosity against the countries supporting Israel. It was important to implement all the resolutions. Israeli violations against the Palestinian people, including the siege, daily killings of civilians which had seen a dangerous escalation in past days in Gaza, and military bombings of civilian homes, had to be stopped immediately and those responsible had to be punished. The Palestinian people must be protected. Also the Arab Group looked to the day when Iraq would experience peace and security. In spite of the efforts of its Government, Iraq still needed help and the foreign occupation had to be put to an end.

MASOOD KHAN (Pakistan), speaking on the behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), congratulated the Human Rights Council and the UN Member States on the near completion of the institution building process of the Council. The challenge was to make optimal use of the newly created institutions, particularly the Universal Periodic Review. This tool should be genuinely universal and it should steer clear of double standards, selectivity and politicization. The review, rationalization and improvement of Special Procedures was work in progress. It had not been possible to conduct this review, rationalization and improvement as envisaged in the institution building package. It was imperative that States sponsoring resolutions reviewed relevant mandates scrupulously in accordance with the parameters. The OIC along with the African Group had asked the President to set aside time to discuss the Strategic Management Plan of the High Commissioner. Contrary to wrong reports in the newspapers, this was not an attack on the High Commissioner. The OIC had repeatedly expressed its full confidence in the ability of the High Commissioner, but the question of the relationship of the Council and the High Commissioner’s Office was long term and wider. Continual and incremental engagement on this issue would help them gain more clarity and traction on how the two bodies should relate to each other more effectively and cohesively.

Concerning the phenomenon of defamation of religions and Islamophobia, this was becoming more dangerous and frequent than anticipated. The reprinting of the blasphemous cartoons and the threat of the release of sacrilegious documentary were inciting hatred and causing huge political and economic costs. The OIC, over the years, had been sensitizing the UN membership on the need to develop a comprehensive convention or tool to fight defamation of religions and intolerance. Also, the Israeli incursions and attacks in the Gaza Strip had resulted in a massive loss of life of civilians, and were a severe blow to the peace initiatives. The OIC would address the situation of human rights in Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territory in the debate tomorrow.

Speaking in his national capacity, he said Pakistan was continuing with its process of reinforcing democracy. The Government had decided to create an independent commission on human rights. Pakistan was running for election to the Council for the period of 2008-2011.

ALEJANDRO ARTUCIO RODRIGUEZ (Uruguay) said Uruguay was here before the Council as testimony of its commitment to its people and the international community to promote and protect human rights for all people in its territory. It was for this reason that Uruguay now reaffirmed its obligations undertaken to implement the provisions derived by the instruments that it had ratified adhering to civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. The compromise of Uruguay, which was also shared by other States represented here, took on a practical form and meant it was ready to be scrutinized by its own citizens as well as by the members of the Council. Uruguay supported the new mechanism for the Universal Periodic Review. Uruguay urged the Council to adopt by consensus the resolution to be presented to the Council regarding the rights of the child. Moreover, Uruguay urged the Council to continue with its necessary and productive work in developing international human rights law. To that end, Uruguay hoped to have invaluable support from the Advisory Committee, which would be elected within the coming days.

SIPHO GEORGE NENE (South Africa) said 60 years ago the world adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Declaration affirmed the right to development as a universal and inalienable right and an integral part of fundamental human rights. Despite these laudable goals, it was regrettable that the lofty ideals espoused in the international arena, did not translate to reality on the ground. South Africa and the Non-Aligned Movement continued to express grave concern about the deteriorating situation in the Middle East. South Africa called on all parties to exercise restraint and continue negotiations towards a peaceful settlement.

South Africa believed that one of the successes of the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document was the creation of the Human Rights Council, including the Universal Periodic Review mechanism. This was a tool to review all countries and had at its core the principle of universality of the application and a spirit of cooperation and capacity building. South Africa welcomed this initiative and remained ready to work on achieving the goals of the Council.

LI BAODONG (China) said that this was the Council’s first main session after the institution building process. The world was far from being a tranquil place and the gap between north and south was still rising. The Middle East and other regions were still suffering, especially in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The Council was duly bound to solve these problems. China believed that the Council would live up to its expectations. Compared with its predecessor, the Council was now working and meeting in more sessions and had a heavier workload. In view of the existence of diverging opinions, everyone had to learn to respect each other. The Council should promote a spirit of harmony. It was natural that there were different methods, ways and processes to fulfil the ideals of human rights.

The Chinese Government took very much to heart the value of human rights. China had suffered such a long time in the past from foreign aggression, wars and poverty. After the founding of new China, the Government and the people had successfully turned it into a country which enjoyed political stability, economic prosperity and social progress. The Chinese Government was following a human centred, fully coordinated concept of development while endeavouring to build a harmonious society, characterized by democracy and the rule of law, equality and justice. The promotion and protection of human rights was a hard and long-term task for all countries, especially developing ones. China was aware that it had a long way to go to promote and protect human rights.

LUIS ALFONSO DE ALBA (Mexico) said the international community must remember and properly appreciate the fact that the Council was a clear outcome of a universal will and the result of an important effort towards conciliation and dialogue. The creation and consolidation of the Council were only the first steps of a broader effort. It was important to recall that the international community had committed itself to raise the level of human rights as the United Nations’ third pillar, and this required a series of measures, some of which were still pending. During the current session, the Council should fulfill important tasks for the full implementation of the institution building agreements, such as the appointment of the Special Procedures mandate holders and the election of the independent experts who would make up the Council’s Advisory Committee. With regards to the substantive issues, Mexico would present two draft resolutions on matters of national priority: the protection of human rights in the fight against terrorism, and, jointly with New Zealand, the human rights of persons with disabilities. The Parliament of Mexico was discussing important initiatives such as embodying in the Mexican Constitution the human rights contained in the international treaties to which Mexico was a party, as well as reforming its Law on Persons with Disabilities. Moreover, the Mexican Congress had recently approved an important judicial reform, as well as the Federal Law to Prevent, Address, Combat and Punish Trafficking in Persons.

MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh), said the Constitution of Bangladesh, which embodied the principles and provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, guaranteed human rights to all its citizens without any discrimination. Bangladesh was a State Party to almost all major international human rights instruments. Poverty remained the most daunting challenge facing nations. As this was widely recognized, poverty was both the cause and consequence of violation of many human rights. If one issue deserved the highest priority in the Human Rights Council, it was how best the international community helped fight poverty and guarantee full enjoyment of human rights. Another formidable challenge was the adverse consequences of climate change. It was a global phenomenon and entailed global attention. The importance of migration to the development efforts of many countries could not be overemphasized. The challenge was to dispel negativity against migrants and protect their rights. It was also essential that this Council took a clear and unequivocal stand on the flagrant defiance of international law, particularly on the violation of fundamental human rights by Israel.

ABDULLA FALAH ABDULLA AL-DOSARI (Qatar) noted that the Council was in the final stages of its creation. Qatar was willing to strengthen the infrastructure for the protection of human right on the local and regional level and on the governmental and non-governmental level. These efforts were based on the principles set out in the Qatari Constitution. Qatar was practicing a policy of openness and was hosting a number of conferences on democracy and human rights. On the role of the media, it was seen as an essential pillar of a democratic society. The importance of the media was seen in the strengthening of dialogue and the promotion of tolerance. Qatar was also involved in several efforts to strengthen the access to work for youth. Qatar had condemned the Israeli incursions into Palestine; the international community had to take up its responsibilities and protect the Palestinian people. Qatar, as a member of the Council, would spare no efforts to support the Council’s strivings to support human rights.

HSU KING BEE (Malaysia) said the Council had reached a critical juncture and now had to effectively translate the hard-won consensus on its architecture and working process into meaningful improvement of human rights situations on the ground. The Universal Periodic Review process would be a crucial step to engage in constructive engagement and dialogue to advance the causes of human rights. The Council should continue to be guided by the institution building framework it had agreed to and created. Malaysia continued to underscore the need for consistency in its treatment of human rights situations and recognized that there would be human rights emergencies requiring special attention of the Council. The lackadaisical attitude of the powerful and the partisans had resulted in the non-implementation of the decisions of three special sessions on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The impunity enjoyed by Israel, the occupying power, gave it the freedom to use its powerful war machine to wrought death and destruction of innocent Palestinian civilians and properties, making a mockery of the commitment to protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all. Given the great inequalities and inequities in the world today, Malaysia wished to underline that the international community must exert efforts to give effect to the fundamental principle that all human rights were universal, indivisible and interdependent. At the regional level, Malaysia had played a crucial role to realize the establishment of an Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) human rights mechanism, which was a central component towards building an ASEAN community.

AZAD CAFAROV (Azerbaijan) said the protection of all human rights in all circumstances was important for the respect of human dignity and values. All human rights were equally important and any hierarchy in this regard was simply irrelevant. The Council demonstrated its commitment to this fundamental premise by adopting at the last session through consensus the draft resolution submitted by Azerbaijan and co-sponsored by many countries on the protection and promotion of cultural rights in situations of armed conflict. As the country that had suffered from massive violations of cultural rights in the occupied territories, Azerbaijan would continue to attach great importance to this topic with the goal, among others, to prevent possible recurrence of this phenomenon in the future.

VALERIY V. LOSCHININ (Russian Federation) said in order to achieve the standards that were proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it was necessary to renounce momentary political interests and concentrate on the efforts of all subjects of the international relations on strengthening dialogue and cooperation, engaging all parties concerned in the collective process of elaborating and making decisions. The United Nations was the prime moving force in this process, like 60 years ago. The United Nations Human Rights Council had successfully passed through the difficult process of its primary formation. It could and must become an effective and efficient tool for promotion and protection of human rights worldwide. To make the work of the Council fruitful, constructive cooperation between States, intergovernmental bodies and civil society was necessary. Conducting the Universal Periodic Review process on the basis of equal and mutually respectful dialogue with full involvement of the State concerned was vitally important. The Russian Federation was gravely concerned about the growth of xenophobia and racially motivated violence in all parts of the world. At the current session the Russian Federation would table a resolution, deploring one of the most detestable instruments of such a policy – the arbitrary deprivation of citizenship. Yesterday at the high-level segment the issue of the so-called “golodomor” – a mass famine that occurred in the third decade of the past century – was raised. In this regard, the Russian Federation called upon all not to engage in political gambling on the issues related to the Russian Federation’s common historic past, sometimes the tragic one, and not to use for that arbitrary interpretation of international law.

TERRY CORMIER (Canada) said the Council had an ambitious programme of work ahead for its seventh regular session. In this work, Canada would be guided by the principles upon which this Council was founded: universality, impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity, constructive international dialogue and cooperation with a view to enhancing the promotion of all human rights. In addition, respect for freedom of opinion and expression was crucial for building a tolerant society. Full exercise of the right to free speech was what gave voice to all other rights. If this right was stifled, the ability to promote and protect other rights - political, civil, economic, social, and cultural - was seriously hindered.

Regrettably, violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, including efforts to unduly circumscribe the right, continued to occur, often with impunity. The Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression played a crucial role in international efforts to promote and protect the exercise of this right. Canada requested the support of all delegations for the renewal of this mandate, which belonged to everyone

ELMER SCHIALER (Peru) said that this was an important period, not only because of the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but also because of the upcoming Universal Periodic Review. In Peru, the judicial system had been consolidated and had become totally independent. Peru was a modern country. After having heavily worked in the Human Rights Commission, Peru had endeavoured to play an active role inside the Council since its first session. An important achievement for the whole human rights system had been the achievement of the right of indigenous peoples. However the reading of the situation today could not be only positive; there were a number of decisions that still had to be taken, including on the Universal Periodic Review, in order to set up the human rights machinery. It was regrettable that the politicization continued to exist inside the Council as had been the case in the former Commission. Also, the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights needed sufficient leeway in order to fulfil its role.

MOUSA BURAYZAT (Jordan) said Jordan was firmly committed to human rights freedoms and human dignity and felt it was important to have an effective partnership between the State, civil society organizations and the media. Many steps had been taken in Jordan to disseminate a culture of human rights in the country and many national laws were being brought in line with the international instruments Jordan had ratified. Additionally, Jordan was reviewing its election laws, those concerning non-governmental organizations and the independence of the judiciary, and it was improving its efficiency. Other national efforts were underway with regard to improving gender equality and a national council for the protection of families was set up to identify priority family issues, including combating violence against women. There was a draft law on this issue being drafted for action by Parliament. Much interest was being given to the rights of the children as well, and efforts on combating torture. There were also greater activities in the National Centre for Human Rights which issued a national report annually and which was currently implementing the Arab strategy on human rights. The Universal Periodic Review would help to set best practices and inform the international community on the positive experiences of Jordan. The tragic situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory was among the most serious challenges before the Council; these included Israeli attacks against innocent women and children. It was hoped that the international community would take its responsibility seriously in this regard.

TAN YORK CHOR (Singapore) said Singapore was heartened that the Council had been responsive to human rights emergences and recalled that at the United Nations Summit in 2005 world leaders had taken a decision in support of ending or preventing genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. There was a general agreement that such situations of serious human rights violations on a massive scale had no more place in this era. By focusing on these emergencies when they occurred, the Council helped to strengthen the norm against such situations developing. Starting by addressing the gravest situations, bit by bit, the Council’s ability to build respect by all States for human rights would grow. This ability, in practice, and not in words only, would be the true measure of the Council’s contribution to mankind. The Human Rights Council was still in its infancy and was still evolving and fragile, plus there were signs of old evil habits returning. One evil was selectivity and double standards, the other was the habit of tabling highly divisive resolutions and forcing the issue to a vote once the sponsors ascertained that they would have enough votes to win. As the Council entered its third year and embarked upon the Universal Periodic Review, the members must adopt a more humble attitude, guard against past mistakes including short-term narrow pyrrhic gains, and promote dialogue and cooperation instead.

LIBERE BARARUNYERETSE, of the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, said that throughout its first year, the Council had taken many steps forward, not only through its institution building process but also through the upcoming Universal Periodic Review. In order to allow the Universal Periodic Review to be held in the best manner possible, the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie had offered its help in the process. The organization was committed to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At the French speaking ministers of justice meeting, Member States had affirmed their commitment to place citizens at the heart of the judicial systems. With the partnership of the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie had drafted a roadmap for the implementation of the major international human rights instruments, the promotion of diversity and the prevention of conflicts.

SONAM T. RAGBYE (Bhutan) said, to the satisfaction of the international community, the Council had achieved definite headway in follow up to the institution building package, adopted last June. Essential institutional appointments and procedures had been launched by the Council towards that end and Bhutan looked forward to establishing the Council’s Advisory Committee, so it may assume its important role within the human rights machinery of the United Nations. Among other concerns related to climate change, Bhutan grappled with the reality of Himalayan glaciers receding at alarming rates, and the looming and immediate threat of glacial lake outburst floods. Climate change was inextricably linked to development. The debate engendered issues of equity, fairness and the right of countries to grow economically. Bhutan therefore welcomed discussion of the human rights dimension of the challenges of climate change within the Council, as a means to compliment and add value to negotiations taking place in the context of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and would like to thank the Maldives for their initiative. This year would also witness the convergence of three historic events in Bhutan that were the culmination of forces that had been pivotal in the transformation of Bhutan’s political landscape.

MOHAMED AHMED SALIM AL-SHANFARI (Oman) said that the sixtieth anniversary year of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was an occasion to continue and improve the work in the field of human rights. Oman guaranteed its citizens a descent way of life. It had acceded to several international human rights conventions and optional protocols in the past years, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Women were occupying important places in Oman, in both the public and private sector. Oman called on all parties to make further efforts to defend human rights, and called on all Council Members in particular to make every possible effort to achieve the noble goals set out in the Universal Declaration.

SIHASAK PHUANGKETKEOW (Thailand) said high hopes and expectations had been placed upon the Human Rights Council. There were also many challenges confronting the international community, with some sceptics already passing judgment on the fate and future of the Council. However, Thailand was confident in the Council's ability to work in a spirit of constructive dialogue and consultation. Human rights were all about human dignity. It was therefore incumbent upon the international community to address all dimensions of human rights – civil, political, economic, social or cultural – as well as the right to development. For the achievement of human rights to be truly meaningful, it should lead to empowerment of the people to take charge of their own lives, free from fear and want. To be effective, human rights should be progressively implemented, taking into consideration the different circumstances of each country. However, that should not be taken as a pretext to evade human rights responsibilities, for all countries, developed and developing alike, should always strive their utmost to reach a higher standard of promotion and protection of human rights.

Thailand said the Human Rights Council was bound to face many enormous challenges ahead. Certainly, there would be many contentious issues in which the international community would have differences. But after all was said and done, what was most vital was the ability to treat one another with mutual respect, the ability to listen to one another and try to understand the other party’s concerns, and the ability to go the extra mile in terms of building bridges to forge consensus and bridge gaps in position, whether real or perceived. If the international community managed to achieve all that, then the world could be confident of having a Council that was effective and credible, and which would truly promote and protect the human rights as declared in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

FRANCISCOS VERROS (Greece) said that, for almost two years, the Human Rights Council had been devoted to establishing its instruments and working methods. The mechanisms were now in place, in particular the Universal Periodic Review, which would have a big impact on the Council’s credibility. For Greece the principle of universal and indivisible human rights was essential. The rights to development, decent housing, access to water and combating extreme poverty were all issues to be worked on together. There were also too many children deprived of dignity and suffering various forms of violence. Children everywhere in the world had to have their right to dignity protected and upheld.

Greece had recently organized a conference to draw attention to climate change and its effect on vulnerable groups. Another priority area for Greece was to eliminate all forms of discrimination. The Review Conference of the Durban Declaration in 2009 had to focus on the implementation of that Declaration. The struggle for human rights could only be overcome through the determination and courage of the international community working together.

ERIKA FELLER, of the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR), noted that there were some 33 million persons of concern to UNHCR, most of whom lacked effective protection of their rights through the normally accountable national structures. The efforts of the Human Rights Council to ensure respect for the universal applicability of human rights norms to everyone, including non-citizens, enlarged protection options for, and reinforced protection obligations owed to, the millions of asylum-seekers, refugees, stateless persons and internally displaced persons under the mandate of UNHCR. The right to asylum was increasingly difficult for individuals to realize, due not least to tightened border security measures, transnational crime and illegal migration. Similarly, with the right of return, the reality was that many displaced persons were unable to return to their homes due to a swathe of legal and practical obstacles. The Council would make an important contribution to underpinning the success of returns by stressing at every appropriate occasion, including in the Universal Periodic Review exercise, that States should create conditions conducive for people to exercise their right to return, and to match that with resources. Otherwise it was a hollow right.

CAROLINE MILLAR (Australia) said the international community needed the Council to play a strong, positive role in promoting and protecting human rights worldwide. The body’s credibility would hinge on its ability to act decisively and quickly on the most pressing human rights situations around the globe. Australia also commended the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for its valuable contribution to the promotion and protection of human rights around the world, including through its engagement in the Asia-Pacific region. Australia particularly looked forward to working with the Office in this sixtieth anniversary year of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Unfortunately, serious human rights abuses continued throughout the world and Australia expected them to be addressed during this session. At the United Nations World Summit in 2005, the international community had recognized the basic principle that Governments had a responsibility to protect their citizens. The Council, as the main human rights body of the United Nations, had a crucial role to play as a forum for early warning and prevention of huge and systematic human rights violations. The Council had available to it a potentially useful set of tools and working practices, including the innovative Universal Periodic Review. There was no excuse for inaction in this forum, and Australia looked forward to helping the Council achieve its objectives. The lives of countless people depended on it.

SEJDI QERIMAJ (Albania) said that Albania had firmly supported the creation and smooth functioning of the Human Rights Council, as a fundamental pillar of the United Nations in achieving its ultimate goal of ensuring a life for all in full enjoyment of their human rights and dignity. The Universal Periodic Review was one of the most important new elements of the Council. That tool had the potential to become a fundamental element of a new, strengthened United Nations human rights system, and Albania looked forward to engaging in a sincere, fruitful and transparent dialogue with the Council during its own review, scheduled for 2009. Albania also attached great importance to the Special Procedures system, to their independence and to the reports that reflected the real human rights situation on the ground. For its part, Albania was preparing itself for upcoming visits by Special Procedures mandate holders.

The right to life was one of the fundamental rights of human beings, and therefore Albania had abolished the death penalty, in accordance with the second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The promotion of dialogue and collaboration between individuals, cultures and religions had long been a priority area for Albania's efforts. Albania was also working closely with human rights defenders, and was very active in the fight against terrorism, the source of grave human rights violations. Albania concluded by reiterating its conviction that the Council would accomplish its mission if its Members continued to share the idea that they all needed an effective system for the promotion and protection of human rights to ensure a better and decent life for all.

DON MACKAY (New Zealand) said this year was a milestone for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which had catalysed so much action and achievement in the promotion and protection of human rights around the world. When the Declaration was being drawn up, New Zealand had fought vigorously to include language that reflected the universality and indivisibility of human rights, and continued to uphold that tradition. The Declaration was the bedrock for the international human rights framework because it affirmed that all persons had the same rights and fundamental freedoms and that all States were subject to the same essential and unrelenting scrutiny of their commitment to uphold the inherent dignity, equal and inalienable rights of all persons.

New Zealand recognized that there were many challenges in that regard. Those differences could feel threatening to those who did not understand them, and there was a risk that diversity could become a source of fear and uncertainty, possibly even a source of conflict. The challenge therefore was to celebrate diversity while respecting and implementing the human rights standards embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that were common to all. Many actors were essential to that task. If the international community was to globally and fully realize the ambitions of those who crafted the Universal Declaration, it had to look at what "effective and full enjoyment" of human rights meant for all categories of rights holders.

ABDULLA ABDULLATIF ABDULLA (Bahrain) said that Bahrain was continuing its efforts to consolidate democracy and human rights in the country and to guarantee the separation of powers, and had ratified many human rights instruments. The Universal Periodic Review was a positive occasion for States to demonstrate their respect of human rights. Bahrain was proud to be one of the first States to be reviewed, as a candidate for Human Rights Council membership.

The attacks in Gaza were a flagrant and clear violation of the human rights of the Palestinian people. The current situation was the clear result of the ongoing Israeli attacks. Furthermore, religions and beliefs could not be insulted under the pretext of exercising the freedom of expression; such actions ran counter to human rights. Wisdom and objectivity were needed.

KRISTINN F. ARNASON (Iceland) said the human rights challenge today was implementation – making the goals and principles of human rights instruments a reality for all individuals. Implementation would include civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights without discrimination as to gender, race or religion. The international community needed to promote tolerance and mutual respect, and continue to fight racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. The human rights situation in a number of countries called for the special attention of the Council. Iceland would support the Council's endeavours to promote implementation of human rights instruments, to constantly remind Governments of their human rights obligations, and to support them in their efforts to comply. The Council should address human rights violations no matter where they occurred. The Council would be judged on the basis of its responsiveness and effectiveness in dealing with human rights issues and situations.

Iceland considered respect for human rights, democracy and good governance as the keys to development. At the same time, development cooperation was a vital tool in furthering human rights promotion and protection. The Council had an essential role to play in strengthening the human rights of women and children. Iceland also reaffirmed its strong support for the work of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and her Office; through the work of the Office, the ability of the United Nations to prevent and respond to violations had been strengthened. Iceland had placed promotion and protection of human rights as a central component in its foreign policy, together with development and the peaceful resolution of disputes, and protecting human rights would remain a top priority for Iceland.

WARREN W. TICHENOR (United States) stated that it must never be forgotten that the basic mission of the Council was to protect and defend people not Governments. The United States welcomed the special sessions on Sudan and Myanmar, but was still waiting for substantive action by those countries and hoped to see strong follow-up measures, as well as stringent action on the tragic human rights situation in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. It was at a time like this when the work of dedicated individuals such as the outgoing Special Rapporteur on Myanmar, Paolo Sergio Pinheiro, was so critical, and when renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the Democratic People's Republic of Korea was so vitally important.

The United States was dismayed by the call for increased limits on freedom of expression, including references to “defamation of religions”. There were times when the content of others’ speech might make one uncomfortable and even angry because it was offensive. There were some who advocated views that were reprehensible. Yet their right to express those views, and to respond, was crucial to the healthy debate that beat back extremism, which was no friend of human rights. Few principles were as central to democracy as the ability to speak one’s own thoughts and opinions freely. Similarly, human rights defenders played a vital role – often at great personal risk – to stand up for the human rights of people everywhere, and to insist on accountable, democratic institutions and practices. The Council should renew the mandate of both of the Special Rapporteurs mentioned without delay.

MAHDI ABDELLATIF AL HINDI (Libya) said that Libya was looking forward to the second year of work of the Human Rights Council. But it had to work without double standards and selectivity. For its part, Libya had worked as a mediator to help to resolve a number crises, in particular on the African continent. It had also provided substantial humanitarian assistance to other countries, and was collaborating with several United Nations bodies in that area, including the World Food Programme. It was also working to provide technological cooperation to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees, and had also donated financial resources to UNHCR.

On the national level, the Libyan Government placed great importance on human rights, and had elaborated a number of laws in that regard, in accordance with international human rights instruments. Libyans lived in a free society where all persons enjoyed their dignity, the right to education, to work, to freedom of expression, and to political participation. Libyan women held high posts in the Government and enjoyed equality with men. In conclusion, Libya noted with regret that the international community had still not put an end to the suffering of the Palestinian people. Libya was also concerned by acts that defamed religions and deplored the wrongful link between Islam and terrorism. Such acts were against the principles established by the United Nations Charter.

IDRISS JAZAIRY (Algeria) said Algeria renewed its commitment to promoting all human rights jointly, without exceptions. The invocation of human rights in this forum continued to bear the stigmata of ideological warfare. Countries continued to selectively condemn human rights abuses. Some had let the collective punishment of civilians in Gaza that had led to the deaths of dozens of women and children pass in silence, while condemning impunity elsewhere in the world. Others considered that the respect for sexual orientation should be universal, but not the respect for religions, which was consecrated in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Yesterday, the Western press acted in concert to accuse African States of seeking to control the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, whereas they supported its independence – that is, its independence from all powers. What had been our crime? It had merely been to ask for General Assembly resolution 60/251 – which stipulates that the Council "assume the role and responsibilities of the Commission on Human Rights relating to the work of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights". Everyone worked hard to keep Africa in the role of the good and obedient child. As soon as it took the initiative in the Council, this year as it had last year, it was demonised and accused of the worst intentions.

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights declared that it was to put an end to impunity throughout the world and was to publish a report in that regard; but to date, the report on her mission to Western Sahara in 2006 had yet to be published. How many victims in Western Sahara could have been saved if that report had been published? Yesterday, the President of the Union of Sahrawi Journalists had published a list of 526 political prisoners and 151 prisoners of war who had disappeared in Western Sahara.

SILVANO M. TOMASI, of the Holy See, said the current debates at the Human Rights Council provided a useful supplement of reflection that led the international community to the heart of the world’s expectations: a recognition of fundamental rights and their implementation. The core rules of human rights were often coloured by the historical experience and cultural traditions of the States and religions where it would be applied. In particular, it seemed that the root of various conflicting positions was the focus of attention placed on the relationship between persons and collectivities. Thus, it became important to clarify and identify were the source and foundation of human rights were found.

The implementation in every country of existing human rights protection instruments, especially the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the related covenants, was the best way to ensure respect of all beliefs and of a peaceful coexistence within pluralistic and interactive contemporary societies. It was important to change attitudes, a long range process that transformed the person and ensure an effective support for dignity and freedoms as to religion and expression and freedom from want and fear. The Council and other UN bodies were called to realize this wish. The human family and the peoples of the United Nations could not wait another 60 years.

OBAID SALEM SAEED AL ZAABI (United Arab Emirates), said that the United Arab Emirates hoped the Human Rights Council would not be politicised as was the case with the former Commission. The United Arab Emirates would be reviewed this year under the upcoming new Universal Periodic Review. The United Arab Emirates had acceded to several conventions to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women and the Committee on the Rights of the Child. Sixty years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, several mechanisms have been put into place but basic human rights were still not enjoyed by everyone in the world, as was the case for the Palestinian people. The consistent failure of the international community to bring peace there was preoccupying. Tolerance between civilisations was also important.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC08011E