HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL DISCUSSES FOLLOW-UP TO ITS SPECIAL SESSIONS ON THE ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL CRISES AND THE FOOD CRISIS

The Human Rights Council this morning discussed follow-up to its Special Sessions on the economic and financial crises and the food crisis, hearing presentations by Navi Pillay, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and Olivier de Schutter, Special Rapporteur on the right to food. It held an interactive dialogue with Mr. De Schutter. The Council also heard an address by the Minister of Justice of Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de), a presentation of the report on the tenth session of the Working Group on the right to development, and a presentation of a series of reports by the Secretary-General and by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Celima Torrico, Minister of Justice of Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de), said that since 2006 there had been a process of democratic change led by President Evo Morales, which was running in parallel with social and indigenous movements. This social change was framed in a new political Constitution which organised and guaranteed all human rights that had been agreed in the various international treaties to which Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de) was a party.

On follow-up to the Special Session of the Council on the economic and financial crises, Navi Pillay, High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that according to projections, more than half the developing countries would see an increase of absolute poverty as a result of the current crises. Nine joint crisis initiatives had been endorsed by the United Nations Chief Executive Board last April, and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had participated in several of them, aiming to ensure that each of these took human rights into account. The crisis had presented and was continuing to present serious challenges to human rights, and it was only a human rights perspective that would allow for the identification of the multiple forms of discrimination due to marginalisation and inequality and that had been exacerbated by the crisis.

On follow-up to the Special Session of the Council on the food crisis, Olivier de Schutter, Special Rapporteur on the right to food, said the objective of this second report before the Council was to examine the measures that States had adopted in order to strengthen their ability to cope in the future with volatility of food prices. The global food crisis should not be seen simply as a matter of insufficient agricultural production or as a mismatch between supply and demand. It instead required, among others, to work on questions such as the organization of the food production and distribution chain, the building of agricultural systems, the development of robust social protection schemes and the improved protection of the rights of landless workers. The right to food was not only about giving legal gravity to the ethical requirement not to remain passive in the face of hunger or malnutrition, but also about taking measures and adopting strategies that could improve effectiveness of any to address this scourge.

In the interactive debate on the follow-up to the Special Session on the negative impact on the realization of the right to food of the worsening of the world food crisis, caused inter alia by the soaring food prices, speakers expressed widespread concern for the increase of hunger in the world which now affected more than one billion people, high levels of poverty, and the reduction of resources for development. Food emergencies still persisted in 31 countries despite all efforts made at both national and international levels and it was regrettable that very limited progress had been achieved despite the enormous human cost of the crises in developing countries. Many countries where crises had emanated were now said to be on the path of recovery, but the same could not be said for developing countries where the situation was worsening and poverty was on the rise. International initiatives to overcome the financial crisis should take into account the developmental needs of all countries and all States must pay attention to vulnerable groups that were the first to bear the brunt of the crises. There was an international responsibility, especially of developed countries, towards more vulnerable States and the need to design and put in place a new global economic and financial architecture. Further investments in agriculture, combating poverty and ensuring the right to food were needed, together with addressing environmental and climate change.

Mona Rishmawi, Officer-in Charge of Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Research and Right to Development Division, delivering the statement of Arjun Sengupta, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the right to development on the tenth session of the Working Group, said the task force should shift its focus from pilot-testing the criteria to consolidating its findings and presenting a revised list of right-to-development criteria, along with the suggestions for future work.

Ms. Rishmawi also presented a series of reports by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Secretary-General, among others, on human rights and transitional justice; the right to truth; the protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism; the right to development; human rights and unilateral coercive measures; human rights education; the death penalty; integrating the human rights of women throughout the United Nations system; and the second follow-up by the Joint Inspection Unit to the management review of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Speaking this morning were Nigeria on behalf of African Group Pakistan on behalf of Organization of the Islamic Conference, Sweden on behalf of European Union, Tunisia on behalf of Arab Group, Colombia on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries, Egypt on behalf of Non-Aligned Movement, Uruguay on behalf of Southern Common Markets MERCOSU, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russian Federation, Cuba, Bangladesh, Belgium, United States of America, Nicaragua, Egypt, Italy, United Kingdom and Republic of Korea, Algeria, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Iraq, European Commission, Australia, and Syria.

Also speaking were the following non-governmental organizations: International Federation of Rural Adult Catholics, Permanent Assembly for Human Rights, International Association of Democratic Lawyers, and North-South XXI.

The next meeting of the Council will start this afternoon at 3 p.m., when the Council is scheduled to hold a general debate on the reports submitted by the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner and her Office. It is also expected to start a general debate on the promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development.


Statement by the Minister of Justice of Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de)

CELIMA TORRICO, Minister of Justice of Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de), said Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de) had been a member of the Council since 2007. In Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de), since 2006, there had been a process of democratic change led by President Evo Morales, which was running in parallel with social and indigenous movements. This social change was framed in a new political Constitution which organised and guaranteed all human rights that had been agreed in the various international treaties to which (Estado Plurinacional de) was a party, including economic, social and cultural rights in accordance with the principle of solidarity, equity, and justice. Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de) had been working in a participatory manner to draw up a national human rights action plan entitled "Bolivia to live well". This human rights plan was also framed in the national development plan, which established a new model for community social development. This new paradigm set out an alternative approach to those followed by past Governments, and was based on a range of strategies, including the eradication of poverty and injustice through a fair distribution of wealth; the construction of a participatory and community society; and strengthening self-determination and international relations.

Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de) was promoting an integrated approach based on the concept of "living well", so that all could enjoy good living conditions. This had been developed in opposition to a concept that was dominant in the world, namely "living better", without thinking of the costs to others. This capitalist development model was the main enemy of human rights. Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de) had thought carefully about the concepts of competitivity and expansion, and preferred the principles of equilibrium, harmony and complementarity. It was in this way that it was implementing plans and programmes and setting up standards, such as the Zero Malnutrition Plan, the plan against poverty, the National Plan for Equality of Opportunity, the Strategic Health Plan, and the National Plan of Living Socially and in Solidarity. Bolivia (Estado Plurinacional de) had established a development fund for indigenous and original peoples and rural communities which made it possible to implement plans on agrarian reform.

Obstacles did not reduce Bolivia's (Estado Plurinacional de) commitment - on the contrary, they strengthened it, and it was therefore going forward to the new general elections in December this year, with heads held high, trusting in the support of the people. Next year, there would be a new, plurinational Parliament, with members committed to the welfare of the nation. All friendly countries were invited to join in Bolivia’s (Estado Plurinacional de) effort for change. All shared the same planet, and should help each other to live better, for the improvement of the living conditions of all in the world.

Documentation

The Council has before it the report of the Working Group on the right to development on its tenth session (A/HRC/12/28). Among the conclusions and recommendations, the Working Group expresses its appreciation to the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development, as defined in the Declaration on the Right to Development, for the work it has carried out in accordance with its mandate. The Working Group agrees that, in accordance with its workplan, the task force should focus on consolidating its findings and presenting a revised list of right-to-development criteria along with corresponding operational sub-criteria. The task force should continue its study of the ongoing development partnerships on the thematic issues of technology transfer and debt relief with a view to further refinement of the criteria. The task force should also ensure that due attention is given to other issues relevant to the right to development, including, inter alia, poverty and hunger, including in the context of climate change and the current global economic and financial crisis. The Working Group recommends that the task force on the implementation of the right to development focus on consolidating its findings and presenting a revised list of right-to-development criteria along with corresponding operational sub-criteria and outline suggestions for further work, including aspects of international cooperation not covered until then, for the consideration of the Working Group at its eleventh session.

Presentation of Report by Working Group on the Right to Development,

MONA RISHMAWI, Officer in charge of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Research and Right to Development Division, delivered the statement of ARJUN SEGUPTA, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the right to development, which presented the report on the tenth session of the Working Group on the right to development and outlined the progress made, such as the creation in 2004 of its high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development and the adoption in 2006 of a preliminary set of criteria for periodic evaluation of global partnerships. This year the Working Group had taken decisive steps and had made constructive recommendations to accelerate the implementation of Council resolutions 4/4 and 9/3 on the right to development.

Mr. Sengupta’s statement outlined the conclusions and recommendations of the tenth session of the Working Group as contained in the report and elaborated on the two most salient elements of the consensus achieved at the aforementioned session. The task force should shift its focus from pilot-testing the criteria to consolidating its findings and presenting a revised list of right-to-development criteria, along with suggestions for future work. Secondly, the Working Group had given its implicit support to the approach proposed by the task force that the revised criteria and sub-criteria should address concerns of the international community beyond those enumerated in the Millennium Development Goal 8 and cover essential features of the right to development as defined in the Declaration on the Right to Development.

The recommendations as to the further defining of the list of criteria made by the Working Group also included drawing on specialised expertise including from academic and research institutions and relevant United Nations agencies and countries, giving due attention to the experience gained from the application of provisional criteria to development partnerships and the views expressed by Member States, continuing study of the ongoing development partnerships on the thematic issue of technology transfer and debt relief and paying due attention to other issues relevant to the right to development, including poverty, hunger, climate change and the current global economic and the financial crisis.

Ms. Rishmawi said that at the request of Dr. Segupta, Professor Stephen Marks would be available at the Council meeting today and act as a resource person for the interaction with the delegates.

Presentation by High Commissioner for Human Rights on Follow-up to Special Session on the Impact of the Economic and Financial Crises on Human Rights

NAVI PILLAY, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said last year when the Council held its Special Session on the financial crisis, the global economy was on the verge of collapse, as the crisis spread. Today, the situation had improved, however, for the poor, the situation would be long-lasting. According to projections, more than half the developing countries would see an increase of absolute poverty. Thus the international community should remain seized of the issue and how it would affect the most vulnerable. An human rights approach helped in this regard - a disproportionate effect was being felt by the marginalised in all countries, especially those States where human rights were curtailed or undermined. Nine joint crisis initiatives had been endorsed by the United Nations Chief Executive Board last April, and these were aimed at streamlining the development response in responding. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had participated in several of these joint crisis initiatives, aiming to ensure that each of these took human rights into account.

The crisis had presented and was continuing to present serious challenges to human rights, and it was only an human rights perspective that would allow for the identification of the multiple forms of discrimination due to marginalisation and inequality that had been exacerbated by the crisis. Government efforts that did not include these were both short-sighted and unjust. Ms. Pillay said she had worked to mainstream human rights within the analysis of the global and financial situation. Neglecting social protection pushed millions towards poverty during the crisis, and States should set up long-standing social protection systems. States should address the indebtedness of low- and middle-income countries, and consider an international debt relief mechanism. While States bore the primary responsibility for their own development strategies, all had the responsibility to help create a fair development environment, promoting equity and social inclusion, and integrating human rights and safeguards systematically in policies and programmes aimed at halting the negative impact of the financial crisis, which should be seen as an opportunity to rectify some of the negative points of the international system which had helped to trigger the crisis. It was her hope that an improved economic system would safeguard the hard-won gains in development, human rights and security.

Documentation

The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De Schutter (A/HRC/12/31), which notes that since the global food crisis has put hunger at the top of the political agenda, important efforts have been put, at both international and national levels, into increasing the supply of food. Producing more food will not, however, reduce hunger if we neglect to think about the political economy of the food systems and if we do not produce and consume in ways that are both more equitable and more sustainable. Nor will increased production suffice if we do not ground our policies on the right to food as a means to ensure adequate targeting, monitoring, accountability and participation, all of which can improve the effectiveness of the strategies put in place. In the report the Special Rapporteur on the right to food seeks to explain why. He describes the current state of the global food price crisis and what the right to food has to contribute at the operational level. He goes on to argue that States should ensure that the reinvestment in agriculture will effectively contribute to combating hunger and malnutrition by assessing the contribution to the realization of the right to food of different modes of agricultural development. The Special Rapporteur ends the report with a plea to improve the global governance of food security. In times of crisis, more than ever, only by strengthening multilateralism can we hope to effectively realize the right to food. If we achieve this, the crisis can be made into an opportunity.

Presentation of Report by Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food on Follow-up to the Special Session on the World Food Crisis

OLIVIER DE SCHUTTER, Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, said this was the second report he presented to the human rights on what had been referred to as the ‘global food crisis’. Between November 2007 and June 2008 the prices of food commodities increased sharply on the international markets, almost doubling in average. Protests, sometimes violent, had spread to almost 40 countries across the globe. Against this backdrop, the objective of this second report before the Council was to examine the measures that States had adopted in order to strengthen their ability to cope in the future with price volatility. Whilst the report was based on a large number of answers to questionnaires, the Special Rapporteur would particularly like to record his deep appreciation to the Government of Germany, the Government of Spain as well as the United Nations Secretary-General. The Special Rapporteur commended this commitment towards the right to food at the highest level of the United Nations.

The global food crisis should not be seen simply as a matter of insufficient agricultural production or as a mismatch between supply and demand. It instead required, among others, to work on questions such as the organization of the food production and distribution chain, the building of agricultural systems, the development of robust social protection schemes and the improved protection of the rights of landless workers. These were also themes the Special Rapporteur had explored in two panels held at the United Nations General Assembly in New York in August 2008 and April 2009. In these fora, the Special Rapporteur argued that the right to food was not only about giving legal gravity to the ethical requirement not to remain passive in the face of hunger or malnutrition. It was also about taking measures, and adopting strategies that could improve effectiveness of any to address this scourge.

The report argued that we could learn from our past mistakes, and made several recommendations therefore. First, it was necessary to reinvest in agriculture. Whilst the global food crisis had led to a welcome renewal of interest in investing in agriculture, Governments needed to consider the choices they needed to make in terms of agricultural development, taking into account the impact of these choices on the right to food. Further, the competition for and speculation on land on both the production and use of agrofuels and transnational large-scale land acquisitions or leases needed to be limited. The Special Rapporteur also recommended the strengthening of social protection which was key to guaranteeing the right to food. Social protection should be granted to all without discrimination. Further, the Special Rapporteur recommended that States shielded from price volatility and combated speculation as net-food-importing countries needed to be better protected from the volatility of prices. Volatility itself could be combated more effectively. Lastly, States should improve global governance of food security. This reform was an opportunity to fundamentally change the incentives structures for both States and international agencies, and to ensure that they will agree to bind themselves to specific targets.

Interactive Dialogue with Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food

OSITADINMA ANAEDU (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the African Group, thanked Mr. de Schutter for his report and said the African Group recognised that concerted efforts must be made to increase food supply. Hunger could not be combated by a mere increase in production, but production and consumption must be regulated in a sustainable manner. The African Group was concerned there were still food crises in some countries and over a hundred million people had fallen below poverty line since 2006 as a result of higher food prices. The African Group supported recommendations made in the report and called on the Special Rapporteur to focus on the impact of agricultural subsidies and agriculture-related technology transfer, the impact of climate change on food security, and the role of mega multinationals dominating the global food chains. Turning to the impact of financial crisis, the African Group was of the view that the crisis had come about as a result of the overwhelming prioritization of the finance sector over and above other productive sectors of the economy. Many countries where crises had emanated were now said to be on the path of recovery, the same could not be said for developing countries where the situation was worsening and poverty was on the rise. The African Group strongly recommended that the desired international initiatives be taken to overcome the financial crisis, taking into account developmental needs of all countries.

MUHAMMAD SAEED SARWAR, (Pakistan), on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, said it remained a matter of concern that despite all efforts made both at national and international levels, food emergencies still persisted in 31 countries, even in 2009, and as per estimates over 100 million people may have fallen below the poverty line since 2006 due to higher food prices. The Special Rapporteur had highlighted a number of important issues such as the multilateral framework or guidelines for land acquisition and biofuels as well as the promotion of the use of eco-agriculture practices, and these merited serious consideration. There was concern that the Special Rapporteur had ignored the impact of agricultural subsidies, the agriculture-related transfer of technology, the impact of climate change agricultural productivity and food security, and the role of meg-multinationals dominating the global food chain. Regarding the impact of the financial crisis, the Organization of the Islamic Conference felt that the current crisis was caused due to predominance of finance over the productive sectors of economy where real wealth was created. With the near collapse of the deregulated financial system, progress towards achievement of the Millennium Development Goals had been seriously undermined. International initiatives to overcome the financial crisis should take into account the developmental needs of all countries. It was time to put in place an internationally-agreed exchange rate system based on the constant and sustainable real exchange rates of all currencies.

CHRISTOFFER BERG (Sweden), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the Council should pay attention to the protection of economic, social and cultural rights as much as it did to civil and political rights. Governments should continue to pay special attention to the ways the global food crisis could affect particularly vulnerable groups as they may be the first ones to bear the brunt. The European Union would be interested in knowing more about how a human rights perspective could be integrated in large–scale land acquisitions, as well as how the compliance of human rights, and particularly the right to food, could be ensured and food security enhanced. It would also value hearing more about the possibilities on how to agree on global sustainability criteria on a multilateral level. Further, the European Union would appreciate an update of recent developments and progress made with regard to the integration of a human rights perspective into international programmes regarding food security. Also, would it be possible to hear how the Special Rapporteur’s proposals to reform the Committee on World Food Security into something far more ambitious were linked to ongoing efforts to reform this Committee, the European Union asked.

ABDELWAHEB JEMAL (Tunisia), speaking on behalf of Arab Group, thanked Mr. de Schutter and said that the Arab Group had carefully examined the content of the report and agreed with the Special Rapporteur’s recommendations. Further investments in agriculture, combating poverty and ensuring the right to food were needed, together with addressing environmental and climate change. The Arab Group supported the call for more balance in leasing the land. The Special Rapporteur had made a documented analysis in his report of the role played by the exploitation of the crisis by certain parties and this required further study. Although the food and financial crises had been discussed in the Council, and United Nations specialised agencies had been conducting studies, the affected countries were still unable to provide resources for development and were lagging on achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Thus there was the need to implement a multilateral, just and transparent world trade system. Countries needed to respect their human rights commitments and urgently move towards the strengthening of social protection measures.

ALVARO ENRIQUE AYALA MELENDEZ (Colombia), speaking on behalf of the Latin American and Caribbean Group, said the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean had closely followed the impact of the global financial and economic crisis on human rights. The Council had a role in discussing this. There was concern for the increase of hunger in the world which now affected more than one billion people, high levels of poverty, and the reduction of resources for development. It was essential to comply with the commitments to fulfil the Millennium Development Goals - addressing the financial and economic crises had to be done whilst keeping in mind its impact on all rights, civil and political rights, economic, social and cultural rights, and the right to food. The Latin American and Caribbean Group had supported the Special Session on the food crisis, and closely followed discussions on the right to food, and agreed with the Special Rapporteur that it was necessary to prioritise the right in the context of measures adopted to deal with the food crisis. His report addressed important issues relating to agricultural production, social protection networks for the most vulnerable, and achieving self-sufficiency in food production, and he should continue to consider ways of strengthening the capacity of developing countries to produce food, and study how agricultural practices of more developed countries distorted production in the developing world.

HISHAM BADR (Egypt), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said the Non-Aligned Movement considered that the Council had reaffirmed and strengthened its credibility in addressing the human rights challenges since it had provided a clear response to the global food crisis by reiterating that all human rights were interrelated. The Non-Aligned Movement reiterated its attachment to the fact that the Human Rights Council continued its follow-up on this issue. The international community could not deal with the global food crisis in isolation from other intricate factors since it had been accompanied by the economic and financial crises. Therefore, the Non-Aligned Movement believed that a comprehensive solution, consisting of concerted multilateral efforts and cooperation, with particular emphasis on the role and responsibility of the international community, was needed in this regard.

MARIA LOURDES BONE (Uruguay), speaking on behalf of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), said many of their concerns had been translated in the report. Hunger had reached historic levels and more people were going hungry as a result of the financial crisis. There was a reversal of the poverty trends in the world and more were becoming poor as a direct consequence of the crisis. If no action was taken, more children would die, discrimination against migrants in countries of destination would increase and many of the Millennium Development Goals would not be achieved. The current global crises should not detract developed countries from fulfilling their obligation of increasing their official development assistance to 0.7 per cent of their gross domestic product by 2015. The Southern Common Market reiterated its support to the right of food and the mandate of the Special Rapporteur. It noted with concern that the food crisis had been worsening around the world and the number of hungry people had been on the increase. The Southern Common Market agreed with the recommendation in the report to give priority to investment in agriculture, food production and strengthening of social protection systems. It expressed its concern in the way which the right to food was being addressed in the Council and said there was a need for better coordination of the Council’s mechanisms.

JOAO ERNESTO CHRISTOFOLO (Brazil) said the Human Rights Council must have a say whenever an issue of global magnitude and concern took place. By doing that, it was important to stress the protection and promotion of human rights in the short term, as well as the strengthening of the role of the Council in the middle term, and further enhancing the United Nations human rights system. The realisation of the right to food had been a priority for President Lula. Contrary to other developed countries, where production was subsidised and prices artificially distorted, in Brazil the Government created the conditions for local producers to commercialise their production, generating thus a positive cycle of development in the local, national and international levels. Unfortunately, the situation of hunger worldwide seemed to have worsened in comparison with 2008. The Special Rapporteur failed to properly address the structural causes of the historic food crisis, and failed to face the core aspects of the matter, which was a problem both of method and selective use of information. The most recent increase in hunger was not the consequence of poor global harvests. The impact of the financial and economic crises should be at the forefront of any analysis regarding the realisation of all human rights. Rich countries needed to reform distorting agricultural policies which depressed prices for smallholders in developing countries. Brazil understood that access to production and fair trade were sine qua non conditions to encourage agricultural producing in the developing world. The Special Rapporteur should pursue a more balanced and objective human rights agenda to address his mandate.

YAO SHAOJUN (China) said China appreciated the work of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food and welcomed his report. Promoting development was a fundamental solution to combat the global food crisis, and the international community should thus increase its input into agriculture and its aid to developing countries in this regard. Whilst the economies of several countries had shown signs of recovery, more long-term efforts were needed to tackle the challenges before us. Developing countries should also show greater responsibility. Further, they should always remember the need for human rights-centered development, and particularly that focusing on economic, social and cultural rights, as this was the only means to enjoy the peoples’ support. The Human Rights Council and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights should follow closely the evolution of both the global food crisis and the financial crisis and put forward their recommendations. Lastly, China wished to reiterate that no country could single-handedly deal with a crisis, and multilateral cooperation should therefore be strengthened. We should in fact join hands so as to turn these two crises into an opportunity.

ROHIT RATHISH (India) expressed its deep concern at the negative impact of the food and the financial crises on social and economic development and the full enjoyment of human rights in all countries, especially the developing countries, which were facing a disproportionate burden. It was clear that the economic slowdown in the wake of the crises had begun to affect achievement of the internationally agreed development goals, including Millennium Development Goals. This would directly impinge on the realisation of basic human rights for a majority of world populations. Crises of such nature needed coordinated response to bring them under control, with minimal impact on developing countries and with the view of reforming the global financial architecture to prevent similar crises. It was regrettable that a very limited progress has been achieved despite the enormous human cost of the crises in developing countries. India was aware of the importance of national policies as an immediate response and major Asian economies, including India, had taken significant and pro-active steps. It must however be kept in mind that in a globalised world domestic policy could not completely negate the effect of the phenomena that originated outside national borders. There was an international responsibility, especially of developed countries towards more vulnerable States and the need to design and put in place a new global economic and financial architecture. India expressed its disappointment that no Special Procedure or Treaty Body had produced any thematic report dedicated to the impact of the current crises on the enjoyment of human rights.

DERSRA PERCAYA (Indonesia) said the food crisis and the current financial crisis were closely interlinked and their resolution needed to be approached through a common paradigm. The simultaneous occurrence of the two crises had produced a nexus which was particularly potent in its combined impacts on the vulnerable economies of the developing countries, many of which were still essentially rural economies, and were ill-prepared for such shocks. As a result, these combined crises represented the single greatest impediment to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. These two crises offered an opportunity to redress faulty systems and mechanisms in such a way to make them work for the prosperity of all, and not to the detriment of the weakest. In order to move things towards effective and lasting results, international cooperation was crucial both in tackling the causes and effects of the financial crisis and in working towards the concrete realisation of the right to food. Reversing the effects of both the economic and food crises and protecting the human rights of the most vulnerable segments of society would also require substantial financial support. The toll of the crises was first and foremost social. States should take these vulnerable groups into consideration, without discrimination, in the implementation of international cooperation and assistance.

ROMAN KASHAEV (Russian Federation) said that the global food crisis had affected all countries, particularly poorer countries. The Russian Federation agreed with the High Commissioner that this crisis was not just a development crisis but also a human rights crisis. It had affected Russia very seriously, but in no way was the need to observe the economic, social and cultural rights of people affected. The crisis forced Russia to move forward faster on its declared priorities. Whilst the crisis was not expected to be over soon, Russia nevertheless needed to prepare as early as now for after the crisis. The Russian Federation believed that the objective should be to achieve concerted efforts within the United Nations system and other international fora. Further, it was necessary to avoid unnecessary competition between various international organizations, and there was a need to create stable conditions where people could feed themselves so as not to reduce their human dignity. The international community must build a world where resources were distributed more rationally and fairly.

RODOLFO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said that during the Special Sessions of the Human Rights Council, they had seen landmarks in ensuring effective response to humanitarian situations. Cuba thanked the Special Rapporteur on the right to food for his commitment and dedication with which he had addressed the world food crisis. The current crises had increased poverty and there was no country immune to their consequences; developing countries were, as always, sacrificed. Global challenges such as the economic and financial crises, hunger, poverty and illiteracy would not be resolved until structural changes as demanded by developing countries were implemented. One in six inhabitants on the planet was denied basic needs such as food, health, education or housing. The rich were denying $ 30 billion which could eradicate hunger from the world. International cooperation was absolutely essential, not only for development but for humans to survive as a species. Cuba underlined that international solidarity was not charity, but a right of human beings.

MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh) said last year the world had faced the dramatic food crisis. National authorities and the global community had taken some actions, and immediate catastrophe had been avoided. However, the crisis was not over - its possibility existed in a subdued manner. Since root causes of the crisis had not been sought in a comprehensive manner, the risk continued to exist, and could resurface. Improvement was needed in a range of areas, and the international community should support national authorities to install social protection programmes for the most vulnerable. More investment in agricultural areas was required to create a level playing field. Only through collective resolve would future food crises be avoided. The global financial crisis was deep and widespread, affecting every country. Its impact was still felt everywhere, in every sector. The future forecast was not very encouraging, as per a recent report of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development, 250 million people would lose employment as an impact of the food crisis. Though there was a sign of partial recovery in some countries, sustained international action with political determination and solidarity were required, and a rights-based approach in global policy making. This was an opportunity to rethink and reshape the global economy.

XAVIER BAERT (Belgium) said the right to food was one of Belgium’s main concerns and the Special Rapporteur’s efforts in this regard were highly appreciated. Belgium had included agriculture and food security in its law on international cooperation, with a particular focus on increasing the productivity of farmers, promoting access of the poorest groups to local production, and adding value to the local productions of poorest countries. The international community must be mobilized for a multilateral approach. The world currently witnessed several simultaneous crises, namely the food, economic and environmental crises, yet none had been resolved as of now. It was therefore essential that the plans implemented to tackle these crises were complementary. In this regard, Belgium entirely agreed with the Special Rapporteur that programmes aiming at the production of biocarburants must be elaborated so as not to endanger the global food security.

JOHN MARIZ (United States) said the United States did not agree with all of Mr. De Schutter’s analysis and recommendations when he had pointed out several areas that needed to be addressed both by individual countries and by the international community. The United States was committed to human dignity and had established numerous programmes both at the state and federal levels to assist it own citizens in accessing food. Further, the United States was committed to working with other nations to assist with their food needs, as evidenced by the fact that the United States remained the single largest donor of food aid worldwide. The needs around the world had been exacerbated by the global financial crisis and the United States was deeply involved in this issue. Governments must take steps to facilitate access to food by promoting a vibrant, strong and sustainable agricultural sector, including the development of free and open agricultural and food markets, implementing sound macro-economic policies, adhering to the rule of law, and others. The topic of food assistance was an important one and the United States thanked the Special Rapporteur for his engagement on this issue.

NESTOR CRUZ TORUNO (Nicaragua) said when the Council met last May to address the food crisis, it adopted a resolution to allow all to address the crisis at the national and global level. However, the financial crisis aggravated it further. For Nicaragua, ensuring food for all Nicaraguans had become a priority, and the Government was undertaking a series of measures, both short- and long-term, to address the issue in the country, having adopted a law on food security which would allow all to access to healthy nutritive food in accordance to their physiological needs. This legal framework was accompanied by a national policy setting out the main guidelines guiding the action of main sectors of society, including civil society organizations and private business engaged in activities to ensure food security with an integrated approach including poverty-reduction strategies. It was Nicaragua's obligation to deal with the problem at the national level, but it was vital that the international community continue to adopt joint sustainable and consistent measures so that developing countries could strengthen their own national capacities.

HEBA MOSTAFA RIZK (Egypt) said the tenth Special Session on the impact of the international financial and economic crises on the effective realization of human rights was a joint initiative which Egypt was proud to have launched with Brazil last February. This initiative had overwhelmingly been supported and contributed to reinforcing the credibility and relevance of this Council. There was no question that the global economic and financial crises affected all countries, but the negative impact on developing countries had been more pronounced and decades of hard work at the national level were at risk of being lost. As a result, developing countries were now facing severe challenges to fulfill their obligations in the area of ensuring the enjoyment by their populations of their human rights. Egypt believed that the Council should remain seized of the matter and continue to provide its input with regard to the human rights dimension of these crises. The Council should also send what Egypt hoped would be a united message of solidarity and collective concern.

ROBERTO VELLANO (Italy) thanked the Special Rapporteur on the right to food and said that from the perspective of global governance, Italy recalled the results of the recent G8 Summit held in L’Aquilla, Italy, where leaders of 40 States and heads of international organizations had convened to unite efforts for hunger eradication and develop common vision and approach to global food security. They had committed to mobilize $ 20 billion over three years through the Food Security Initiative, in support of rural development in poor countries. Leaders had further promoted the advancement of the Global Partnership in Agriculture and Food Security to keep agriculture at the core of the international agenda. This Partnership was intended to generate political momentum for a comprehensive, inclusive, action-oriented and effective response to food security and national, regional and global levels. United Nations agencies, based in Rome and dealing with food and agriculture, must play a crucial role in this respect.

MELANIE HOPKINS (United Kingdom) said the economic crisis continued to present a significant challenge to all, affecting the lives of citizens around the world and requiring a global response. The actions which countries took at the London Summit in April this year were substantive, and had a significant impact in reassuring world markets of the commitment to financial stability and tackling the crisis. As the world approached the Pittsburgh Summit, it should build on these conclusions, ensuring that the right framework was put in place to return to sustainable growth in future, as well as ensuring mitigation of the impact of this crisis on the poorest in society. Only through collective and coordinated action could this goal be achieved. It was right that the Council and other United Nations human rights mechanisms played a part in this international effort, but only in so far as to address how human rights could have been affected as a result of the economic downturn. States bore the primary responsibility for ensuring the protection of the human rights of their citizens, even in times of crisis, and should therefore ensure that they did not neglect or undermine human rights protections, paying particular attention to the vulnerable such as women, children, and the disabled. States should ensure that discriminatory practices did not take root, and that channels of legal redress remained open. Where economic uncertainty gave rise to tension, protecting and promoting all human rights, whether economic, social, cultural, civil and political, would form part of an effective response and help to defuse tensions.

CHUN HYE RAN (Republic of Korea) thanked the Special Rapporteur on the right to food for his comprehensive report which had put forward insightful recommendations on the ways to transform the global food crisis into an opportunity. Simply producing more food could not be a sustainable solution. Rather, a more holistic approach that would also address the root causes of the crisis was needed. The Republic of Korea agreed with the Special Rapporteur on the need to reinforce multilateralism to effectively address the structural causes of the global food crisis. The realization of the right to food was indeed a global common good that should be pursued by the international community as a whole. Further, what was the opinion of the Special Rapporteur on how to ensure the accountability of Governments, the Republic of Korea asked. It would also greatly appreciate if the Special Rapporteur could provide examples of good practices regarding accountability mechanisms.

IDRISS JAZAIRY (Algeria) said that the recent succession of crises had undermined the capacity of the international community to predict and prevent crises, which had had disastrous human consequences. Food emergency situations now affected over 30 countries and the number of people suffering from hunger was over one billion. Algeria believed that particular attention, at the multilateral level, must be given to the revision of means of agricultural production and the promotion of equality in food markets. The Human Rights Council should call for the implementation of measures set in the final document of the United Nations Conference on global financial and economic crises and their impact on development, held in June 2009, including notably increased aid to agricultural sectors in developing countries, sustainable development, food security, gender equality and should also give priority attention to the growing intolerance and xenophobia, particularly with regard to migrant workers.

DANTE MARTINELLI (Switzerland) said Switzerland particularly appreciated the importance given by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food to modes of agricultural production based on the concept of sustainability, and believed that this concept was a key to the future. Switzerland also shared his opinion on the need to reinforce world governance on agriculture and food security, but was in favour of the inclusion of the private sector in the process of reform, to which the Special Rapporteur had not referred, and Switzerland wished to know why, and whether he saw a role for the private sector in this regard. The Special Rapporteur did not mention the upcoming summit on food security to be held in Rome next November, and Switzerland wished to know to what extent he was associated in the preparation of this summit. Finally, his thoughts on the right to food and the acquisition of large parcels of land were interesting, and Switzerland would communicate with the Special Rapporteur on the principles he had elaborated in this regard.

JEAN FEYDER (Luxembourg) said Luxembourg had taken particular interest in the part of the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food on the role of international markets in dealing with the issue of prices fluctuations. Luxembourg also commended the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation relating to the creation of food stocks on a local and national level so as to reduce the impact of high prices on international markets. Further, as discussed by the Special Rapporteur, sufficiently stable and lucrative prices for those who suffered most from hunger were needed. The currently observed price reductions were also so significant that producers were unable to cover their costs of production, thus accentuating the vulnerability of the rural population and leading to rural exodus. A further instrument in this field could also contribute to tackle price volatility and regulate markets.

The Representative of Iraq commended the Special Rapporteur on the right to food on his report which was the reflection of the link to dignity of human kind. Poverty eradication required adequate policies on both national and international levels. Iraq had devised a food security plan that was based on individual food requirements and had committed 21 per cent of its annual budget to national food security. There was also a long term plan for food security and protection of consumers from food prices volatility. Food assistance was being channelled to the poor and vulnerable and social protection measures were provided to extremely vulnerable categories of the population, such as female-headed households, orphans, the elderly and others.

JOELLE HIVONNET (European Commission) said the European Commission had a number of questions on the report on the right to food: first, how did the Special Rapporteur intend to further his analysis of existing right to food strategies and initiatives undertaken at country level, and to evaluate their impact and eventual weaknesses; second, in relation to social protection measures, the European Commission wondered whether and how the self-targeting food-for-work programmes that were referred to in the report could effectively represent an empowerment tool for vulnerable people also, such as elderly people; finally, the European Commission would appreciate receiving additional information on whether the Special Rapporteur would further the analysis of large-scale land acquisitions and of their potential impact on food security, and how to ensure that this analysis fed into the ongoing work of the Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Bank and other institutions.

ANGELA ROBINSON (Australia) said Australia was strongly committed to practical and effective action to improve global food security at local, national, regional and global levels. In this spirit, the Australian Government had announced earlier this year a 464 million Australian Dollar programme to support increases in food production globally over four years. Australia agreed with Special Rapporteur on the right to food that better governance was needed indeed to address global food insecurity, and it also agreed that a reform of the Food and Agricultural Organization’s CFS was an important part of this.

ABDULMONEM ANNAN (Syria) said Syria’s budget consecrated a significant amount to agriculture. This policy made compatible a sustainable primary sector and the right to food. On the global level, developing countries should be able to participate in decision-making processes, which was not currently the case. The issue of the shrinking of Arab lands due to desertification raised the problem of the responsibility of developed countries in this regard, and the Special Rapporteur should give his opinion on the matter.

M. PIERRE MIOT, of International Federation of Rural Adult Catholic Movements, in a joint statement with Europe-Third World Centre, said that according to the International Labour Organization the food crisis had worsened over the years but States had not taken sufficient action in recognising agricultural and food sovereignty. No progress had been made in the issue of bio-fuels. The Federation was concerned by the type of the agriculture practiced and the identity of beneficiaries. All over the world States had been investing outside of their territories to rent thousands of hectares of food to ensure food for their populations, and this was to the detriment of small farmers. The Human Rights Council should integrate all aspects of land use that affected small farmers into its work and future study.

PABLO FRESNEDA, of Permanent Assembly for Human Rights, said the Permanent Assembly for Human Rights expressed its concern at the continuing poverty and the worsening environment which undermined the food security of the people of Argentina. Further, transgenic Soya covered large amounts of land and was exported to industrialized countries, which was the result of neo-liberal policies. The right to adequate food was also threatened by agricultural companies which pursued their interests, and transnational corporations which were accentuating the global food crisis by adopting an agricultural model in which farmers found no place.

YORIO SHIOKAWA, of International Association of Democratic Lawyers, said recently in Japan from December 31 2008 to January 5 2009, over 500 persons were given shelter to pass the end of the year. This was a campaign conducted by volunteers to save jobless workers who were dismissed and lost their residence at the same time. Due to neo-liberal economic policies, waves of structural reforms had affected everyday life, in particular constantly pushing deregulations in the labour sector. As a result, many enterprises in Japan relied heavily upon non-regular workers in seek of cheap labour with relatively less social security. This was a contemporary form of extreme poverty. It was urgent to work for a global economic system which ensured that workers were properly protected in law and practice, and that the practice of non-regular employment was eliminated, as well as to combat the deregulation of labour, at global, national and local levels.

CURTIS DOEBBLER, of North-South XXI, believed there was an inseparable link between the global economic crisis and the global food crisis and welcomed the remarks of the High Commissioner and many States who had called for a more equitable world order. This was at the very core of ensuring the right to food and combating poverty. The duty of States to cooperate was a serious one and required more equitable approaches to development, climate change, reform of the international financial, economic and political architecture, to name some.


Concluding Remarks by the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food

OLIVIER DE SCHUTTER, Special Rapporteur on the right to food, welcomed the interactive dialogue with the Human Rights Council. Answering some of the questions asked, the Special Rapporteur said, concerning climate change, that he would present a set of precise recommendations in this regard at the Copenhagen Conference later this year. As for the enquiry that had been made on drought, the Special Rapporteur replied that the impact of climate change highlighted how important this issue was. Some countries, such as Tanzania and Malawi, had already conducted exemplary initiatives to tackle this challenge. With respect to the question on large-scale land acquisitions and leases, the Special Rapporteur said that a detailed paper on this was available on the website of the mandate. It was his belief that certain large-scale investments in land could work for the benefit of communities, and that there were very positive examples and interesting good practices in this regard. The principles he elaborated on large-scale investments in land should also be implemented. As for the question relating to the reform of the Food and Agricultural Organization, the Special Rapporteur said that his proposals were inspired by what he had seen in Brazil and Guatemala, and that the private sector had a legitimate role to play in this reform process. In conclusion, the Special Rapporteur asserted that good practices became more frequent, and that he hoped to present a comparative assessment of what had been done in terms of good practices in this field before the end of the year.

Documentation

Under its agenda item on the annual report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and reports of the Office of the High Commissioner and the Secretary-General, the Council has before it an analytical study on human rights and transitional justice (A/HRC/12/18) which first contains an overview of activities undertaken by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) field presences and human rights components of United Nations peacekeeping and political missions. OHCHR has actively supported transitional justice programmes in more than 20 countries around the world, offering human rights expertise during peace negotiations; assisting in the design and implementation of transitional justice processes and mechanisms, such as truth commissions and other fact-finding processes, prosecution initiatives, reparations programmes and institutional reform; and providing conceptual and policy support at headquarters. OHCHR continues to explore new areas of transitional justice, based on recent developments in international law and the needs of field presences, with a view to assisting post-conflict States.

There is a report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on Right to Truth (A/HRC/12/19) which contains a study on best practices for the effective implementation of the right to truth, in particular practices relating to archives and records concerning gross violations of human rights, and programmes on the protection of witnesses and other persons involved in trials connected with such violations.

There is a report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism (A/HRC/12/22) which analyses the links between counter-terrorism measures and economic, social and cultural rights. It examines how international treaty obligations to promote and protect these rights should form part of the counter-terrorism strategy of a State. It highlights the need to protect and promote all human rights and in particular economic, social and cultural rights, while at the same time taking effective counter-terrorism measures. Protecting and promoting all human rights while countering terrorism are complementary and mutually reinforcing objectives. They must be pursued in the context of the duty of States to protect, respect and fulfil all human rights.

There is a report of the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the right to development (A/HRC/12/29) which contains a summary of the activities undertaken by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights with regard to the implementation of the right to development. Particular attention is given to the activities in support of the open-ended Working Group on the Right to Development and the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development, and other activities that could contribute to the implementation of the right to development.

There is a report by the Secretary-General on human rights and unilateral coercive measures (A/HRC/12/30), submitted in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 9/4, in which the Council requests the Secretary-General to seek the views and information of Member States on the implications and negative effects of unilateral coercive measures on their populations and to report thereon to the Council. On 8 June 2009, the Secretary-General sent a note verbale to Member States seeking their views and information. As of 24 June 2009, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has received responses from the Governments of Belarus, Costa Rica, Iraq, Spain and Ukraine.

There is a note by the Secretariat under the Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the implementation of Human Rights Council resolution 10/22 (“Combating defamation of religions”) (A/HRC/12/39) which notes that the Human Rights Council, in resolution 10/22 of 26 March 2009 entitled “Combating defamation of religions”, requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to report to the Human Rights Council on the implementation of this resolution at its twelfth session. On 10 June 2009, a note verbale was sent by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, inviting Member States to forward their contributions to the report on the implementation of resolution 10/22 to the Secretariat. In order for the report of the High Commissioner to include the broadest number of contributions, the High Commissioner requests that the submission of her report to the Human Rights Council be delayed to its thirteenth session.

There is a report of the Secretary-General on the question of the death penalty (A/HRC/12/45) which contains information covering the period from June 2008 to July 2009, and draws attention to a number of phenomena, including the continuing trend towards abolition, the practice of engaging in a national debate on the death penalty, and the ongoing difficulties in gaining access to reliable information on executions. It includes changes and practices, including countries which have abolished the death penalty for all crimes, countries which have abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes, countries which have restricted the scope of the death penalty or are limiting its use, countries which have ratified international instruments that provide for the abolition of the death penalty, countries observing a moratorium on executions, and countries which have reintroduced the use of the death penalty, extended its scope or resumed executions. It also contains data on the enforcement of the death penalty and international developments. Finally, it contains the Secretary-General's conclusions on the matter, namely that developments on the question of the death penalty outlined in this report suggest that while the trend towards abolition continues, some States are maintaining the punishment while gradually restricting its use.

There is a note by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on Human Rights Bodies and Mechanisms (A/HRC/12/47) which contains the report of the sixteenth meeting of special rapporteurs/representatives, independent experts and chairpersons of working groups of the special procedures of the Human Rights Council, which took place in Geneva from 29 June to 3 July 2009. During the meeting, participants focused their discussions on the independence and effectiveness of the special procedures and on harmonization of the working methods of mandate holders. They also discussed their linkages with the universal periodic review mechanism and thematic issues including protection of victims and witnesses, and climate change. They welcomed the appointment of six new mandate holders and paid tribute to outgoing mandate holders.



Presentation of Reports by the Office of the High Commissioner and the Secretary-General

MONA RISHMAWI, Officer in Charge, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Research and Right to Development Division, said with regards to the analytical study on human rights and transitional justice (A/hrc/12/18 and Add.1), the study contained an overview of activities undertaken by the Office field presences and human rights components of United Nations peacekeeping and political missions, and illustrated how the Office and the United Nations human rights presence had actively supported transitional justice programmes in more than twenty countries around the world, showing how transitional justice was now a dynamic field. However, in order to better assist countries emerging from conflict, some new areas required further development. It also outlined additional areas for future exploration. The report on the right to truth (A/HRC/12/19) contained a study on best practices for the effective implementation of this right, in particular examining two areas: peace relating to archives and records concerning gross violations of human rights, and programmes on the protection of witnesses and other persons involved in trials connected with such violations, showing that these two areas were complementary.

The report on the protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism (A/HRC/12/22) analysed the links between counter-terrorism measures and economic, social and cultural rights, examining how international treaty obligations to protect and promote economic, social and cultural rights should form part of States' counter-terrorism strategies. Protecting and promoting all human rights while countering terrorism were complementary and mutually reinforcing objectives and duties. On the right to development (A/HRC/12/29), the report contained a description of relevant Office activities, with particular attention given to those in support of the inter-Governmental open-ended Working Group on the Right to Development and the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development.

The report of the Secretary-General on human rights and unilateral coercive measures (A/HRC/12/30) summarised responses received from the Office from the Governments of Belarus, Costa Rica, Iraq, Spain, and Ukraine. The report on the second phase of the World Programme for Human Rights Education (A/HRC/12/36) summarised contributions and views expressed by Governments, national human rights institutions, inter-Governmental and regional organisations, as well as NGOs, on the possible focus, in terms of target sector or thematic area, of the second phase of the World Programme for Human Rights Education, and offered some general conclusions drawn from the wide variety of approaches and suggestions contained in the submissions by stakeholders. With regards to the report of the Secretary-General on the question of the death penalty (A/HRC/12/45), it contained information covering the period from June 2008 to July 2009, and drew attention to a number of phenomena, including the continuing trend towards abolition of the death penalty, the practice of engaging in a national debate on capital punishment, and the ongoing difficulties in gaining access to reliable information on executions.

The report on integrating the human rights of women throughout the United Nations system (A/HRC/12/46) focused on identifying obstacles and challenges as a starting point, and also included concrete recommendations on how to overcome challenges and obstacles that could stand in the way of the Council's action. Finally, the Council had before it a report of the Joint Inspection Unit (A/64/94) on its Second follow-up to the management review of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and this report addressed the status of implementation of recommendations made by the Unit in its initial review of the Office in 2003, and in particular those that were considered as still in progress during their first follow-up review in 2006. The Office was pleased that the report recognised the ongoing efforts made by the Office to expand the diversity of its staff, and the consistent progress accordingly being achieved.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC09106E