HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HEARS PRESENTATION OF REPORTS ON RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT, OPTIONAL PROTOCOL ON CHILDREN’S RIGHTS AND THEMATIC ISSUES

The Human Rights Council this morning heard statements by the Chairperson of the Open-Ended Working Group on an Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the Right to Development, and the Director of the Human Rights Council and Special Procedures Division of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights who presented a series of thematic reports by the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights and her Office.

The Council was also addressed by the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, who said that the Organization of the Islamic Conference was deeply concerned that the instances of intolerance, discrimination and acts of violence against followers of certain religions, including cases motivated by Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and Christianophobia and discrimination against religious minorities, threatened to impede their full enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms. All xenophobic campaigns of fear mongering and discriminatory measures which restricted, prohibited or discriminated against any religion, must be strongly condemned by the international community, and Mr. Ihsanoglu called upon all States to consider taking specific measures aimed at fostering a domestic environment of religious tolerance, respect and peace.

Drahoslav Stefanek, the Chairperson of the Open-Ended Working Group on an Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, said that a draft Optional Protocol and explanatory memorandum had been prepared and circulated by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to all Permanent and Observer Missions and other stakeholders. The proposal was prepared taking into account the importance of ensuring consistency and coherence with respect to existing instruments. The draft would soon be available in all official United Nations languages, and Mr. Stefanek looked forward to hearing the views of States and other stakeholders including civil society and national human rights institutions. A one-day informal consultation would be held in Geneva next November, and these consultations would be an important step in the preparation of the second session of the Working Group.

A statement was read out on behalf of Arjun Sengupta, the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the Right to Development, which stated that it was the view of the Working Group that States should endeavour to take steps, both individually and collectively, to establish, promote and sustain national and international arrangements that created an environment that enabled the full and effective realization of the right to development. For this to occur, regional groups needed to bridge their differences in order to fulfil their commitment at the Millennium Summit “to making the right to development a reality for everyone”. The Working Group also concluded that further work needed to be undertaken at the intergovernmental level to adequately reflect both the national and international dimensions of the right to development.

Bacre Waly Ndiaye, the Director of the Human Rights Council and Special Procedures Division of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, introduced a number of thematic reports from the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights and her Office. The documents he outlined included a report on the question of the death penalty; a report on activities aimed at strengthening the global partnership for development between Member States, development agencies and the international development, financial and trade institutions; a report which identified trends and best practices in the use of forensic experts in case of gross violations of human rights; a report containing a summary of discussions and recommendations from the seminar on a human rights approach to combating human trafficking held in May 2010; a report on the draft plan of action for the second phase of the World Programme for Human Rights Education; a report on the challenges and best practices in the implementation of the international framework for the protection of the rights of the child in the context of migration; a report on the right to truth; a thematic study on discrimination against women, in law and practice and how the issue was addressed throughout the United Nations human rights system; a report on the efforts by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the United Nations to strengthen the implementation of the 1992 Declaration of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious or Linguistic Minorities; an analytical report on the impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights; the report of the seventeenth annual meeting of the Special Procedures; a report on journalists in armed conflict; a report on the proceedings from an international workshop on enhancing cooperation between international and regional human rights mechanisms; a report containing the draft programme of activities for the International Year for People of African Descent; and a report on how to improve conference and secretariat services for the Council.

The President of the Human Rights Council, Sihasak Phuangketkeow, provided a progress report on the open-ended intergovernmental working group which was tasked with reviewing the work and functioning of the Human Rights Council. Mr. Phuangketkeow said that he had begun consultation on the programme of work of the first intergovernmental working group, with the aim of building consensus and to ensure that the programme of work provided enough space for everyone to engage fully in this process and that there was enough flexibility in time management so that there was sufficient time for discussion on all important issues. Mr. Phuanketkeow said he now hoped that discussion could begin on substantive issues. Before the first working group meeting, he intended to convene one or two more open-ended consultations to finalize the draft programme of work and perhaps to start the discussion on substantive issues.

The Human Rights Council this morning also concluded its clustered interactive dialogue with the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation and the Independent Expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty.

In closing remarks Catarina de Albuquerque, Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, noted that the adoption of the General Assembly resolution recognizing the right to water and sanitation as a human right was a crucial step. It meant that the Council could put to rest the debate of whether this right existed or not and direct its collective energy on implementing the right to safe drinking water and sanitation. Regarding the upcoming Millennium Development Goals Summit next week, the Independent Expert said that Millennium Development Goals must be implemented with human rights in mind and she emphasized that the quantity of water needed for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals on water and sanitation was not too much; deciding how and where the water was used was a question of policies and priorities.

Maria Magdalena Sepulveda Carmona, the Independent Expert on the question of human rights and extreme poverty, concluded by saying that formulating guidelines was not enough, as had been pointed out by some countries; it was important to build systems to eradicate poverty around the world, and to include those living in extreme poverty around the world in those efforts, as they were often not fully identified, and were not involved by policy makers. Governments must have adequate information in particular on the causes for their extreme impoverishment. By adopting the Guiding Principles, the Council would help bring visibility to these persons, and the need for targeted principles to reach them. The Guiding Principles were not a political statement, but included practical measures to enable Governments to allow their population to escape extreme poverty.

In the interactive debate on safe drinking water and sanitation, speakers noted that involving the private sector in the provision of water and sanitation services did not in any way reduce the responsibility of the State as the primary guarantor of the human rights of the people, and they welcomed the suggestion that States should adopt strong rights-based regulatory frameworks to govern the actions of private service providers, that contracts with such providers should be human rights-sensitive, and that human rights impact assessments should be conducted throughout. Water was a commodity that could not be left to the regulation of the market and governments were obliged to make sure that the poor had access to a basic water supply and sanitation. Speakers posed a number of questions, including whether there was a list of lessons learned and best practices that could be shared with States that were trying to balance their human rights obligations relating to access to safe drinking water and sanitation.

Concerning the question of human rights and extreme poverty, speakers said the report of the Independent Expert offered an opportunity to enrich and improve the draft principles on extreme poverty and human rights. These were based on international human rights standards that had been agreed upon at the international level, and should contribute to the empowerment of those living in extreme poverty, and ensure that they were directly involved in discussions on matters concerning them. Other speakers said that the Independent Expert’s report on extreme poverty could not have come at a better time as the international community was struggling to respond to global financial and food crises. At the same time, governments would soon begin preparing the United Nations agenda for post 2010 and those guiding principles laid out in the report, if finalized, could serve as a useful tool for evaluating and improving on the Millennium Development Goals and developing measures against crisis.

Speaking in the interactive dialogue on safe drinking water and sanitation and on extreme poverty were Slovenia, Algeria, Japan, Djibouti, Philippines, Bolivia, Portugal, Cuba, Morocco, Egypt, Maldives, Thailand, Norway, Holy See, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Malta, South Africa, Canada, Ethiopia, Peru, Viet Nam and Senegal.

The following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: International Movement ATD Fourth World, France Libertés: Fondation Danielle Mitterand, Action Internationale pour la paix et le développement dans la region des Grands Lacs, CIVICUS, the European Disability Forum and Amnesty International.

The Council today is holding back-to-back meetings from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. The Council will this afternoon hold a general debate on the thematic reports of the Secretary-General, High Commissioner, and Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights as well as the reports on the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and on the Working Group on the Right to Development.

Interactive Dialogue on Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation and on Human Rights and Extreme Poverty

MARKO HAM (Slovenia) noted that in May of this year the Independent Expert on the right to clean drinking water and sanitation, Catarina de Albuquerque, visited Slovenia and this was the first visit made by any Special Procedure to the State. Slovenia thanked the Independent Expert for her preliminary note on her mission to the country, in which she found that overall the enjoyment of the rights to water and sanitation was ensured to the vast majority of the population; however, she emphasized that some persons belonging to Roma communities did not fully enjoy these rights. The Government of Slovenia was aware of the situation and had already been striving to accelerate the regulation and improvement of the living conditions of the Roma, together with their better integration and preservation of their culture and language. Most of the Roma communities without access to safe drinking water and sanitation were settled illegally and due to environmental reasons not all of these settlements could be legalized. Competent ministries would therefore provide the support and aid to local communities to solve the existing problems.

SELMA MALIKA HENDEL (Algeria) said that Algeria was one of the first countries to recognize the legal right of access to water and sanitation. A ministerial department had been set up in charge of addressing the issue of access to water. Algeria had achieved Millennium Development Goal Number Seven and had made great progress in the fields of water and sanitation provision, including an overhaul of the country’s sewage treatment. In fact, Algeria was proud to announce that most of the recommendations made in the report had already been implemented. Algeria also added that it had sent an invitation to the Independent Expert six months ago and was still waiting for a response. On the issue of extreme poverty, Algeria said that those affected by extreme poverty were excluded from society and the Government was working to empower the extremely poor. Local economic and social institutions would be crucial in helping to lift communities out of extreme poverty.

FUMIKO NISHIHARA (Japan) said Japan hoped that the compendium of good practices on the role of non-state actors presented in the report of the Independent Expert on safe drinking water and sanitation would contribute to the improvement of the efforts of all countries to ensure access to safe water and sanitation around the world. Japan wanted to hear the Independent Expert’s views on specific measures to enhance cooperation between States and non-state actors. Japan believed that safe water and sanitation were essential to the enjoyment of everyday life and that was why Japan had been actively assisting countries in need to resolve those issues in keeping with the concept of human security which focused on the protection and empowerment of individuals and communities. Finally, Japan was looking forward to the Independent Expert’s report on her visit to Japan of July 2010.

AHMED MOHAMED ABBO (Djibouti) thanked the two Independent Experts for their reports and said Djibouti would focus the intervention on the report of Ms. Catarina de Albuquerque on safe drinking water and sanitation. Djibouti particularly supported the models for provisions of services laid out by the Independent Expert in her report. Djibouti reaffirmed the crucial role that States had to play to fully achieve human rights, whether they provided the services or not. Djibouti had shown its commitment to this through the development of a national programme for safe drinking water and sanitation. Djibouti particularly took note of the Independent Expert’s recommendation that States should take into account the impact on human rights when they developed services for the access to water.

EVAN P. GARCIA (Philippines) said the Independent Expert on extreme poverty had done commendable work to improve the draft guiding principles, especially in terms of seeking to strike an appropriate balance between national and international obligations. International solidarity and cooperation, realization of the right to development, and fulfilment of internationally-agreed development goals and commitments should be factored into the equation of eliminating extreme poverty, especially for developing and least developing countries. While it remained the primary responsibility of the State to protect and promote human rights, these international and structural factors could not be overlooked when talking about eradicating extreme poverty and promoting the rights of persons living in extreme poverty. The draft guiding principles emphasised reaching out to persons living in extreme poverty, ensuring their participation in all aspects of political, economic, social and cultural life; and stressed the importance of non-discrimination and not stigmatising persons living in extreme poverty. The Council should finalise them and promote their implementation in the near future.

MAYSA URENA MENACHO (Bolivia) thanked both Independent Experts and said that Bolivia appreciated that the report on water and sanitation focused on the human rights obligations of States. In the case of water and sanitation, Bolivia believed that the private sector should always operate within the legal provisions in the territory in which it was working. The right to water and sanitation was enshrined in the Bolivian Constitution. Bolivia submitted a resolution to the General Assembly last July which recognized the right to safe drinking water. This resolution, A/RES/64/292 was voted through in a clear majority and Bolivia appealed to all Member States and non-governmental organizations to adhere to it. Bolivia concluded by saying that more than ten years ago, the social and indigenous movements in Bolivia had been fighting for the right to water, oftentimes directly clashing with private companies who had a different agenda.

ANA E BRITO MANEIRA (Portugal) said Portugal valued the work done by the Independent Expert on safe drinking water and sanitation, which had helped Portugal in its internal evaluation of water and sanitation policies. In her report, the Independent Expert elaborated that States must not discriminate against any groups or individuals in the provision of services but rather must adopt targeted measures to reach the most marginalised. Portugal asked the Independent Expert to give some examples of such measures and inquired about the issue the Independent Expert would address next year in her thematic report.

MARGARITA VALLE (Cuba) said the issue of water was at the heart of the problem of the survival of humanity - there were more than 884 million people without access to sources of safe drinking water, and 2.6 billion, of which 1 billion were children, had no access to basic sanitation. Cuba considered access to water to be a basic human right. Almost the whole population had access to safe drinking water. The framework of human rights had no preference as regarded the models for the provision of services, and human rights to water and sanitation should be guaranteed. The report preceded the United Nations General Assembly meeting, held last July, when the body adopted a resolution which recognized the human right to drinking water and sanitation. The resolution adopted did not contradict or prejudice in any way, but merely complemented and strengthened the discussions that were being carried on in the Human Rights Council on water and sanitation. The report contained valuable recommendations to be carried out by States in fulfilling their duty to provide safe drinking water and sanitation. The Independent Expert should continue her efforts and work to achieve a proper solution to the problems of water in the world. International cooperation and support to developing countries with financial and technological resources was very important.

MOHAMED ACHGALOU (Morocco) said that Morocco accorded great importance to the mandate of the Independent Expert on water and sanitation and reiterated the invitation to Ms. Albuquerque to come visit the Kingdom of Morocco. Morocco fully supported the point made by the Independent Expert to invite international financial institutions to help find adequate solutions to water provisions problems, whilst ensuring the promotion and protection of human rights. Morocco remained committed to improving the technical and financial management of water and sanitation services in its country and to the improvement of water rates, particularly for disadvantaged communities. Finally, Morocco said that more consultations and greater involvement of Member States needed to take place in the drafting of guidelines.

HEBA MOSTAFA RIZK (Egypt) said that with the growing role of the private sector and non-state actors, States were opting for other alternatives to fulfil their obligations toward their population, including in the provision of water and sanitation services. However, such delegation of service provision did not exempt them from their obligations to guarantee the protection of human rights by instituting legal and regulatory frameworks that ensured adherence of non-state actors to the respect of human rights, and in particular though the employment of the “protect, respect and remedy” framework that addressed human rights and the practices of private business enterprises. This was particularly important as the provision of water and sanitation services had direct implication on human rights. On the issue of extreme poverty Egypt noted with interest the detailed list of recommendations for refining the relevant guiding principles. International efforts should be accelerated to face the challenge of persisting conditions of extreme poverty in various parts of the world. Finally, Egypt called for further consultations to discuss the refined guiding principles based on the recommendations of the Independent Expert.

IRUTHISHAM ADAM (Maldives) said the Constitution of the Maldives recognized the right of all citizens to clean drinking water and sanitation, and the Maldives was therefore delighted that General Assembly resolution 64/292 took the step of recognising those crucial components of the right to an adequate standard of living at a multilateral level. The subject of safe drinking water and sanitation was very relevant to the Maldives, which, because of its unique geography and environmental vulnerability, faced particular difficulties in providing clean water to its people. The subject was also relevant as privatisation and boosting the role of the private sector in service provision was one of the priorities of the current Government. Involving the private sector in the provision of water and sanitation services did not in any way reduce the responsibility of the State as the primary guarantor of the human rights of the people, and the Maldives therefore welcomed the suggestion that States should adopt strong rights-based regulatory frameworks to govern the actions of private service providers, that contracts with such providers should be human rights-sensitive, and that human rights impact assessments should be conducted throughout. Such principles and recommendations were not only applicable to the private provision of water services, but also other services such as health and education. The Independent Expert should indicate what steps States could take, especially developing countries facing capacity constraints, to ensure that privatisation programmes complied with the very highest human rights standards.

Mr. VIJAVAT (Thailand) said that since Thailand’s culture was intricately linked with water, the Government had long attached great importance to water resource management. As such, Thailand had already halved the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation well in advance of the 2015 deadline. However, challenges still remained in the standardization of the quality of tap water in both urban and rural areas. On the issue of human rights and extreme poverty, the Thai delegation reiterated that it had to be viewed from a dual perspective, that of development and human rights. In this regard, Thailand agreed with the Independent Expert that poverty could be both a cause and consequence of human rights violations and could, in some cases, even lead to conflict situations. Thailand concluded by saying that it would continue to play an active role in bridging the development gaps in its region.

BENTE ANGELL-HANSEN (Norway) commended the initiative of the Independent Experts on safe drinking water and sanitation and on extreme poverty to conduct joint missions and added value to all parties involved. The report of the Independent Expert of extreme poverty presented valuable reflections of the multiple obstacles for the fulfilment of human rights of people living in extreme poverty and the recommendations on how to improve draft guiding principles were useful input in this process. Those guiding principles could help address the gap between human rights standards and the actual situation of persons in extreme poverty. Concerning access to safe drinking water and sanitation, Norway said that the focus on private provision of water and sanitation was timely and relevant and agreed that States had to achieve the full realization of the right to water in a non-discriminatory manner. Water was a commodity that could not be left to regulation of the market and even after the privatisation process governments were obliged to make sure that the poor had access to a basic water supply and sanitation. Norway concluded by asking the Independent Expert about her views on the gender perspective in the issue of access to safe drinking water and sanitation and how it should be addressed by relevant actors.

SILVANO TOMASI, of Holy See, said the availability of fresh water had now become correlated more obviously to human rights such as the right to life and health. While in the Millennium Development Goals the international community had set itself the goal of halving by 2015 the number of people globally without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation, nearly 900 million people today continued to rely on unimproved water sources for their drinking, cooking, and other basic needs. Today approximately 2.5 billion people around the world, approximately half the developing world, were not served by improved sanitation conditions. As a result, nearly 1.8 million children under the age of five died annually from diarrhoeal diseases attributable to a lack of safe drinking water and basic sanitation options. Many obstacles impeded progress toward achieving the proposed goals. Poor people often suffered, not so much from a scarcity of water itself, but rather from the economic ability to access it. Water was a social, economic and environmental asset whose management must be based on social responsibility, a mentality of ecological behaviour, and of solidarity within countries and globally. The fight against poverty and hunger required more and more targeted interventions and solidarity in order to guarantee universal access to water for personal survival, health, and for the development of agriculture and the production of food.

ERIK NYMAN, of United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), welcomed and supported the work of the Independent Expert on access to safe drinking water and sanitation and welcomed the recent General Assembly resolution recognising the right to water and sanitation. UNICEF was pleased to work with governments, communities and households to ensure those rights were realized, especially for children. UNICEF was committed to a human rights-based approach, which involved participation, empowerment and education and had led to new programmatic approaches at the field level. UNICEF offered continued technical support to the mandate, urged Member States to support the mandate and activities and looked forward to continued elaboration with governments and the Independent Expert.

MARIE-THERESE PICTET-ALTHANN, of Sovereign Military Order of Malta, said that the reports being discussed today on safe drinking water and sanitation and on human rights and extreme poverty were of particular relevance to the Sovereign Military Order of Malta’s mission of assistance to the poor and the suffering, with special attention to the poorest amongst the world’s people. Through its health and social welfare activities in 120 countries, the Sovereign Military Order of Malta strived to reduce inequalities and social exclusion by delivering medical and humanitarian aid, as called for by the Millennium Development Goals. Water was essential for life, health and human dignity. In addition to access to safe drinking water a number of vector-borne diseases were related to poor water supply and sanitation. While focusing on alleviating poverty, it was therefore essential to implement measures and programmes that embraced the strong links between health, water, sanitation and hygiene. On the subject of extreme poverty, the Sovereign Military Order of Malta hoped that the Council would finalize the Guiding Principles, thus allowing all stakeholders working on poverty issues to strengthen their efforts toward the elimination of extreme poverty.

JERRY MATHEWS MATJILA (South Africa) said South African Human Rights Law was predicated on the principles of human dignity, equality, and non-discrimination, and therefore South Africa was encouraged by the report of the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights and extreme poverty. Structural discrimination relegated the African population to the periphery of society, hence the two streams of the economy challenge that the Government was tackling. The Government had also put in place progressive laws to deal with the emancipation of women, thereby ensuring equal access to the productive means of the economy for women. Furthermore, the Government had begun a process of identifying indigent families, so that measures may be designed to assist them. Due to the high priority it placed on the eradication of poverty, the Government had established a war room on poverty, which ensured that there was consultation with various civil society organizations to ensure the representation of people living in conditions of poverty in policy formulation.

LORAINE ANDERSON (Canada) said that Canada agreed with the Independent Expert that there were human rights obligations relating to the access to safe drinking water and sanitation. Canada was therefore pleased to note that the Independent Expert had chosen to explore this relationship within the context of non-State service provision of water and sanitation services. Canada asked the Independent Expert if she had any views on what methods could be used to encourage cooperation yet avoid duplication between her mandate and the work of other Special Procedures. Moreover, Canada asked whether there was a list of lessons learned and best practices that could be shared with States that were trying to balance their human rights obligations relating to access to safe drinking water and sanitation.

ALLEHONE MULUGETA ABEBE (Ethiopia) said the Ethiopian Government gave the utmost importance to access to water and sanitation and was aware of the importance of ensuring and guaranteeing that access. Ethiopia was the second most populous country in Sub-Saharan Africa and its population was expected to grow rapidly in the coming decades. A large segment of the country was reliant on subsistence agriculture which heavily depended on seasonal rains. Due to climate change, rains now tended to start later and end earlier than before, while rain frequency, distribution and predictability had decreased. Access to water in Ethiopia was among the lowest in the world and women and children had to walk for hours to get drinking water. Lack of access to water, particularly in the pastoralist areas was leading to increased competition and conflict over pasture. The Government was taking a number of measures, in particular the adoption of a comprehensive water management policy, water saving, expansion of water wells in pastoralist areas and forestation. Ethiopia reiterated that the realization of the right to safe water and sanitation and reducing extreme poverty would be addressed in the growth plan which the country had launched recently.

CARLOS SIBILLE (Peru) said the report of the Independent Expert on human rights and extreme poverty offered an opportunity to enrich and improve the draft principles on extreme poverty and human rights. These were based on international human rights standards that had been agreed upon at the international level, and should contribute to the empowerment of those living in extreme poverty, and the need to ensure that they were directly involved in discussions on matters concerning them. Peru would continue to contribute to the ongoing work to achieve a final set of draft principles that would be a practical guide to implementing the existing obligations of States to protect and implement the human rights of those living in extreme poverty. The report on safe drinking water and sanitation showed that the context of human rights did not require a particular context of service provision, but that whichever was chosen, the State was primarily responsible for the protection and promotion of human rights, and should ensure due diligence to ensure respect for human rights at every stage of the process. States should implement social policies to ensure access to safe water and sanitation where non-State actors did not have the resources.

NGO LE HOANG VU (Viet Nam) said that Viet Nam attached great priority to providing access to safe water and sanitation. Concerning the presentation on human rights and extreme poverty, Viet Nam recognized the different types of violations of the human rights of the poorest and most vulnerable groups. It was a pleasure to note that the international community was giving this issue greater attention. Viet Nam said that States should have the primary responsibility in providing human rights to their citizens. Finally, the delegation took note of the role of non-State entities in the provision of water services and the potential problems linked their involvement.

MARIAME SY (Senegal) said that access to safe drinking water and adequate sanitation services represented one of the most important priorities for Senegal. For several decades, the Senegalese Government had established water management policies that were aimed at providing drinking water in sufficient quantity, appropriate quality and an affordable cost. These policies had led to national laws such as the water code, the sanitation code, the hygiene code and also to the construction of several water infrastructure projects. Particular attention was given to Senegal’s poorest communities, most notably in urban areas and the countryside. In closing, Senegal said that in its rural areas there were about 700 water and sanitation management committees, which remained largely informal and community-based, that were actively implicated in the decision-making and management of local water and sanitation services.

JANET NELSON, of International Movement ATD Fourth World, in a joint statement with severals NGOs1,welcomed the report of the Independent Expert on human rights and extreme poverty and the recommendations on how to improve the draft guiding principles. The drafting process started almost 10 years ago and the final product was now in sight. It could not be timelier, as the international community was struggling to respond to global financial and food crises. At the same time, governments would soon begin preparing the United Nations agenda for post 2010 and those guiding principles if finalized could serve as a useful tool for evaluating and improving on the Millennium Development Goals and developing measures against crises. In order for the guidelines to become a regular basis for decision-making in anti-poverty programmes, the International Movement ATD Fourth World suggested the addition in the final text of a section on monitoring which would emphasize the importance of developing indicators and benchmarks.

ORETTA BANDETTINI DI POGGIO, of France Libertés – Fondation Danielle Mitterrand, in a joint statement with American Association of Jurists, International Educational Development, and Mouvement contre le racisme et pour l'amitié entre les peuples - MRAP), said that the adoption of the General Assembly resolution recognising access to safe water and sanitation was historic. France Libertés had been advocating for the recognition of the universal right to safe water for over 20 years. The Millennium Development Goals on water and sanitation were still far from being achieved. France Libertés fully supported the work of the Independent Expert on the obligations on safe water and sanitation. Her conclusions on the role and behaviour of non-state actors in the provision of safe drinking water and sanitation were very striking, for example with regard to unequal coverage, or drastic increases in prices. The report said that the State was fully responsible for the provision of services even when the provision was delegated to non-state actors. The General Assembly resolution made no reference to the responsibility of States and non-state actors which seriously prevented the enjoyment of those rights. There should be global water governance which would recognise water as a public good and ensure it was passed on to the next generation.

MAURICE KATALA, of Action internationale pour la paix et le développement dans la région des Grands Lacs (AIPD), said the question of extreme poverty in a world full of wealth raised questions of an ethical and moral order. Some developing countries, in particular in Africa, had been reduced to economic dependency. Populations had been forgotten after being rejected such as in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where tens of thousands lived without any form of services, medical, or other, including a lack of drinking water, disastrous agriculture, and a lack of literacy and schooling. To try to respond to this situation, a non-governmental organization had been created and it was working on building a health centre. The Democratic Republic of the Congo had many areas like this, and it was urgent for the Human Rights Council to urge States to put into practice the main principles of development, international cooperation, human dignity and the right to life.

RENATE BLOEM, of CIVICUS - World Alliance for Citizen Participation, said the report on extreme poverty and human rights was a timely contribution to the United Nations Summit on the Millennium Development Goals to be held later this month. Human rights needed to be at the heart of achieving the Millennium Development Goals, in particular in all approaches to overcome extreme poverty. The Independent Expert's proposals now provided a conceptual framework for the draft Guiding Principles, entirely embedded in human rights principles of indivisibility, interconnectedness, universality, non-discrimination, State obligations, and international cooperation. They further placed human dignity at the centre of all deliberations, and clearly marked the linkage of extreme poverty between the causes and consequences of human rights violations. It was important to include both those living in extreme poverty and civil society organizations in the fight against poverty.

ELLEN WALKER, of European Disability Forum, said that the right to water and sanitation was inextricably linked to the right to live in the community, the right to accessibility, and the rights to life, health, adequate standard of living and social protection, which were all contained in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. People with disabilities around the world experienced many barriers to their enjoyment of the right to water and sanitation because of discrimination and social exclusion. In many developing countries, persons with disabilities had to travel long distances to get water. In the view of the European Disability Forum, States should change the built environment to remove physical barriers to water and sanitation by adapting existing infrastructure and buildings in consultation with persons with disabilities.

PATRIZIA SCANELLA, of Amnesty International, said that reaffirmation of the rights to water and sanitation would assist in efforts to meet Millennium Development Goal number seven to reduce by half the proportion of people unable to access safe drinking water and basic sanitation. The right to sanitation was particularly critical as Millennium Development Goal seven was among those that were significantly off-track. In 2009 and 2010 Amnesty International carried out research on the situation of Roma communities in Slovenia with regards to access to water and concluded that many Roma settlements did not have access to piped water. The representative also addressed the situation of sanitation in Kenya, particularly in slums and informal settlements. As such, Amnesty International called on the Kenyan Government to enforce the obligations of landlords to construct toilet and sanitation facilities in the slums and settlements and urged the Government of Kenya to extend an invitation for a visit by the Independent Expert.

Concluding Remarks

CATARINA DE ALBUQUERQUE, the Independent Expert on the Issue of Human Rights Obligations Related to Access to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation, said there were many interesting points raised during the interactive debate. All of those points would be addressed in writing and the communication would be sent to governments and non-governmental organizations. The adoption of the General Assembly resolution recognising the right to water and sanitation as a human right was a crucial step. It meant that the Council could put at rest the debate if this right existed or not and direct its collective energy on implementing the right to safe drinking water and sanitation. Several States had indicated that water and sanitation were part of the right to an adequate standard of living. The language used in the report on the right to sanitation was used with the understanding that sanitation was part of the right to an adequate standard of living. Regarding the upcoming Millennium Development Goals Summit next week, the Independent Expert said that Millennium Development Goals must be implemented with human rights in mind.

Many speakers had mentioned water scarcity as a problem and many countries did face this problem which was being exacerbated with the impact of climate change. The Independent Expert emphasized that the quantity of water needed for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals on water and sanitation was not too much, more was needed for agriculture for example. Deciding how and where the water was used was a question of policies and priorities. There were many questions of good practices and a number of countries already shared examples. The Independent Expert would submit to the Council in September 2011 a compilation of good practices. Meanwhile she would organise consultations and seminars for governments and private sector organizations. Finally, on cooperation with other mandates, Ms. Albuquerque said that cooperation was very important for the furthering of her own mandate. The recent joint mission with the Independent Expert on extreme poverty for example had shown the untapped potential of Special Procedures.

MARIA MAGDALENA SEPULVEDA CARMONA, Independent Expert on the Question of Human Rights and Extreme Poverty, said given the many questions raised on the issue, she wished to point out that she fully shared the comments made, and agreed with the delegations that said that it was very important for the draft guidelines to be finalised. These guidelines stressed the importance of international assistance. She fully agreed with delegations who indicated that national obligations should be included in the final text of the obligations. With regard to the comment made by Bangladesh, the resource constraints were recognized in the report, which included several Government policies aiming to improve access to safe drinking water and sanitation, but she believed more should be done. Formulating guidelines was not enough, as pointed out by Nigeria and Pakistan - it was important to build systems to eradicate poverty around the world, and to implicate those living in extreme poverty around the world in those efforts, as they were often not fully identified, and were not involved by policy makers. Governments must have adequate information in particular on the causes for their extreme impoverishment. By adopting the Guiding Principles, the Council would help bring visibility to these persons, and the need for targeted principles to reach them. The Guiding Principles were not a political statement, but included practical measures to enable Governments to allow their populations to escape extreme poverty.

Presentation by President of the Council of Progress Report on the Review Process of the Council

SIHASAK PHUANGKETKEOW, President of the Human Rights Council, said, in accordance with the mandate given by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 60/251 for the Human Rights Council to review its work and functioning, the Council had adopted Resolution 12/1 which established an open-ended intergovernmental working group to carry out the task. The resolution also requested the President to undertake transparent and all inclusive consultations on the modalities of the review and report to the Council. Pursuant to this, he had carried out extensive informal consultations with various delegations and relevant stakeholders to discuss the modalities as well as the agenda and programme of work of the review. In this regard, he referred to the paper on “the proposed modalities of the review of the work and functioning of the HRC in accordance with OP 16 of UNGA Resolution 60/251” which was circulated as the Chair’s text and which had been embraced by all as providing the overall parameter and guideline for the review process.

Based on these modalities, the President had started consultation on the programme of work of the first intergovernmental working group, with the aim of building consensus and to ensure that the programme of work provided enough space for everyone to engage fully in this process and that there was enough flexibility in time management so that there was sufficient time for discussion on all important issues.

The President had made a trip to New York last week specifically to discuss the issue of coordination between the review processes in New York and Geneva, with a view to bringing greater clarity to the coordination and timeline of the two processes. From his discussion with the President of the General Assembly and the two facilitators, the understanding that had been reached was that the review to be undertaken by the General Assembly and the review by the Council were distinct processes but mutually reinforcing. The plan was to conclude the review in June 2011, but if possible the Human Rights Council would try to expedite the process, bearing in mind the aim of the President of the General Assembly to conclude the process within his Presidency, by July 2011.

Mr. Phuanketkeow said he now hoped that discussion could begin on substantive issues. Before the first working group meeting, he intended to convene one or two more open-ended consultations to finalize the draft programme of work and perhaps to start the discussion on substantive issues.

Documents

The Report of the Secretary-General on how to improve conference and secretariat services for the Council, (A/HRC/15/17), is a result of resolution 12/1 entitled “Open-ended intergovernmental working group on the review of the work and functioning of the Human Rights Council”, adopted on 1 October 2009 by the Human Rights Council in which it requested the Secretary-General to present a report to the Council at its fifteenth session on how to improve conference and secretariat services for the Council.

The Report of the Secretary-General on the question of the death penalty, (A/HRC/15/19), contains information on the question of the death penalty covering the period from June 2009 to July 2010, and draws attention to a number of phenomena, including the continuing trend towards abolition and the ongoing difficulties experienced in gaining access to reliable information on executions.

The Report of the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the right to development, (A/HRC/15/24), contains a summary of the activities undertaken by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights with regard to the promotion and realization of the right to development. The activities ranged from mainstreaming the right to development, including by strengthening the global partnership for development, to providing support to the Human Rights Council and its subsidiary mechanisms related to the right to development.

The Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the use of forensic experts in case of gross human rights violations with a view to identifying trends and best practices in this regard, (A/HRC/15/26), compiles responses received from numerous States and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations on best practices in the use of forensic genetics for identifying victims of serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law with a view to considering the possibility of drafting a manual that may serve as a guide for the application of forensic genetics, including, where appropriate, the voluntary creation and operation of genetic banks, with appropriate safeguards.

The Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the proceedings of the seminar aimed at identifying opportunities and challenges in the development of rights-based responses to trafficking in persons, (A/HRC/15/27) is currently unavailable. 9/14/10

Views on the Recommended Principles and Guidelines on Human Rights and Human Trafficking, (A/HRC/15/27/Add.1) is currently unavailable. 9/14/10

The Draft Plan of Action for the Second Phase (2010 to 2014) of the World Programme for Human Rights Education, (A/HRC/15/28), focuses on human rights education for higher education and on human rights training for teachers and educators, civil servants, law enforcement officials and military personnel, prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner in accordance with Council resolution 12/4.

The Study of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on challenges and best practices in the implementation of the international framework for the protection of the rights of the child in the context of migration, (A/HRC/15/29), seeks to set out the specific standards and principles that inform the international framework of protection of the rights of the child in the context of migration; examines challenges in the practical implementation of this framework, and notes some best practices in terms of legislation, jurisprudence and joint efforts at the bilateral, regional and international levels; and ends with conclusions and recommendations which aim to strengthen the implementation of the international framework and better protect the rights of the child in the context of migration.

The Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the right to truth, (A/HRC/15/33), reviews various international legal provisions on States’ obligations to protect witnesses, victims and others concerned, and discusses relevant judicial practice and jurisprudence. The report also discusses various witness protection measures and programmes which are available at the international and national levels and explains the key elements which are essential for establishing an effective witness protection programme, while good practices and relevant standards are discussed throughout the report. The report affirms that too few examples of witness protection programmes operating at the national level and relating to investigation and prosecution of gross violations of human rights or serious violations of international humanitarian law exist.

The Thematic Study of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on discrimination against women, in law and practice, and how the issue is addressed throughout the United Nations human rights system, (A/HRC/15/40), provides a thematic study on discrimination against women, in law and practice, and how the issue is addressed throughout the United Nations human rights system. This has been undertaken in consultation with States, relevant United Nations bodies, mechanism and agencies, including the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the agencies within the new United Nations composite entity on gender, and other stakeholders, as requested by Human Rights Council resolution 12/17.

The Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the promotion and respect for the provisions of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, (A/HRC/15/42), provides a summary of efforts being made by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and United Nations human rights machinery to strengthen the implementation of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities. The report also provides information on capacity-building activities to facilitate and increase the ability of minorities to draw on the United Nations international and regional human rights bodies and mechanisms for the protection of their rights, summarizes the most relevant concluding observations on the rights of minorities made by treaty bodies in considering initial and periodic reports of States parties, and provides an update on the work of relevant special procedures mechanisms with regard to the rights of minorities.

The Report of the Secretary-General on human rights and unilateral coercive measures, (A/HRC/15/43), analyzes the responses submitted by 11 States on their views on human rights and unilateral coercive measures. Most States responded with reference to the requirements of international law. Some States expressed the view that under some circumstances, some unilateral coercive measures might be acceptable, provided that they comply with international law. A few States stressed the importance of solving international disputes through regional and international mechanisms.

The Note by the High Commissioner for Human Rights transmitting to the Human Rights Council an update of the report of the Secretary-General on the comparative summary and existing communications and inquiry procedures and practices under international human rights instruments and under the United Nations system, (A/HRC/15/49) notes that the Office of the High Commissioner is preparing an updated report with a view to making it available to the Open-ended Working Group at its second session, to be held from 6 to 10 December 2010. The High Commissioner will submit that report, together with the report of the Open-ended Working Group on its second session, to the Council no later than at its seventeenth session.

The Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the outcome of the panel discussion on the protection of journalists in situations of armed conflict, (A/HRC/15/54), provides a summary of a panel discussion that aimed to: (a) draw the attention of the international community to the dangers faced by journalists in armed conflict; (b) take an inventory of international frameworks and agreements applicable to journalists and the media in situations of armed conflict and the status of their implementation; and (c) contribute to the development of an appropriate response by the Human Rights Council.

The Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the discussions held at the workshop on regional arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights, (A/HRC/15/56), details the work done at the international conference titled, “Enhancing cooperation between international and regional human rights mechanisms”, which was held in Geneva, on 3 and 4 May 2010. The conference was organized by the Office of the High Commissioner and participants included representatives of regional human rights mechanisms in Africa, the Americas and Europe, as well as of sub-regional mechanisms in Africa.

A/HRC/15/56/Corr.1 is not currently available.

The Report of the Working Group on the right to development on its eleventh session, (A/HRC/15/23), summarizes the proceeding of the session, during which the Working Group considered the report of the high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development on its sixth session, held in Geneva from 14 to 22 January 2010, comprising the main report, the consolidation of findings and the right to development criteria and operational sub-criteria.

Statement by the Chairperson of the Open-Ended Working Group on an Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child

DRAHOSLAV STEFANEK, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Open-Ended Working Group of the Human Rights Council on an Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, said the Council had decided to establish the Working Group to provide a communications procedure complementary to the reporting procedure under the Convention. The draft Optional Protocol was to be circulated in all official United Nations languages by September 2010. The past months had been busy in this regard. A draft Optional Protocol and explanatory memorandum had been prepared and circulated by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to all Permanent and Observer Missions and other stakeholders. The proposal was prepared taking into account the importance of ensuring consistency and coherence with respect to existing instruments. It used, wherever possible and appropriate, agreed language from similar optional protocols and relevant provisions of treaties, and took into consideration expert submissions and views expressed. However, it also had been guided by the importance of having an instrument which fully took into consideration the specificities of the Convention and the special needs of children, who would be the primary beneficiaries of the future optional protocol. Thus, some provisions could be considered innovative, in the same way as the Convention itself was at the time of its adoption, and still was, an innovative instrument.

The draft would soon be available in all official United Nations languages, and Mr. Stefanek looked forward to hearing the views of States and other stakeholders including civil society and national human rights institutions. A one-day informal consultation would be held in Geneva next November, at which all Missions and other stakeholders would be invited. These consultations would be an important step in the preparation of the second session of the Working Group. The Human Rights Council should take advantage of the fact that the proposal for a draft Optional Protocol had already been made available in one official language, and would soon be circulated in all other United Nations languages well in advance of the December session of the Working Group - this was quite unique, and Mr. Stefanek was confident that such an early publication would enable sufficient time for careful preparation for the negotiations on the Optional Protocol that would be reflected in efficient deliberations.

Statement by the Chairperson of the Working Group on the Right to Development

CRAIG MOKHIBER, of the Research and Right to Development Division, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, delivered a speech on behalf of ARJUN SENGUPTA, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the Right to Development, who, due to health reasons, could not be present. A high-level task force of five Independent Experts was established in 2004 in order to provide expert advice to the deliberations of the Working Group. This year the task force presented a set of three substantive reports on a) suggestions from the task force for further work in the realization of the right to development; b) the consolidation of the main findings of the task force over the past five years of its mandate; and c) a set of criteria and operational sub-criteria in contribution to the collaboration of a comprehensive and coherent set of standards for the implementation of the right to development.

Mr. Mokhiber reminded the Council that next week the United Nations Summit would convene in New York to review the status of achievements in reaching the Millennium Development Goals. Millennium Development Goal Eight, with its focus on international cooperation, was a framework consistent with international responsibilities outlined in the Declaration on the Right to Development. In this context, the task force engaged in constructive dialogue and collaboration with multilateral institutions responsible for some twelve global partnerships in the area of development aid, trade, access to medicines, debt sustainability, and transfer of technology. However, a number of challenges still existed for many development partnerships, particularly in introducing right to development considerations in their policies and programmes. It was the view of the Working Group that States should endeavour to take steps, both individually and collectively, to establish, promote and sustain national and international arrangements that created an environment that enabled the full and effective realization of the right to development. For this to occur, regional groups needed to bridge their differences in order to fulfil their commitment at the Millennium Summit “to making the right to development a reality for everyone”. The Working Group also concluded that further work needed to be undertaken at the intergovernmental level to adequately reflect both the national and international dimensions of the right to development. Finally, the Working Group had requested that the Chairperson-Rapporteur prepare two compilations of submissions received from Governments, group of Governments and regional groups, as well as the inputs received from other stakeholders, with the assistance of the OHCHR.

Presentation of Thematic Reports of the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights

BACRE WALY NDIAYE, Director of the Human Rights Council and Special Procedures Division at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, introduced thematic reports submitted to the Human Rights Council by the United Nations Secretary-General, the High Commissioner for Human Rights and her Office.

The Report of the Secretary-General on the question of the death penalty (A/HRC/15/19) covered developments from 30 June 2009 to 1 July 2010. Those developments suggested that the trend towards the abolition of the death penalty was continuing, but serious problems remained with regard to respect for international law in countries where death penalty was still imposed. The report on activities aimed at strengthening the global partnership for development between Member States, development agencies and the international development, financial and trade institutions (A/HRC/15/24) outlined activities undertaken in mainstreaming the right to development, in strengthening global partnerships and identifying challenges ahead. Trends and best practices in the use of forensic experts in case of gross violations of human rights were identified in the report (A/HRC/15/26), which also included the use of forensic genetics for identifying victims. The report (A/HRC/15/27) contained a summary of discussions and recommendations from the seminar on human rights approach to combating human trafficking held in May 2010. An Addendum provided a brief introduction and background to the Recommended Principles and Guidelines and a compilation of challenges and emerging good practices in applying human rights-based approach to identification and victim protection.

The draft plan of action for the second phase of the World Programme for Human Rights Education (A/HRC/15/28) offered specific guidance for governments and other relevant actors with regard to national implementation of human rights education in primary and secondary schools, both in terms of process and content. If adopted, this text would serve as a reference and methodological tool for human rights education work. The study of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on challenges and best practices in the implementation of the international framework for the protection of rights of the child in the context of migration (A/HRC/15/29) set out the specific standards and principles that inform this framework, examined challenges in its practical implementation and noted best practices in terms of legislation, jurisprudence and joint efforts at different levels. The report on the right to the truth (A/HRC/15/33) reviewed various international legal provisions on States’ obligations to protect witnesses, victims and other concerned, and discussed relevant judicial practice and jurisprudence. The report recommended that States considered developing comprehensive witness protection programmes covering all types of crimes. A thematic study on discrimination against women, in law and practice and how the issue was addressed throughout the United Nations human rights system (A/HRC/15/40) outlined international standards, obligations and commitments of States to ensure equality between women and men, to eliminate discrimination against women in general and to address discriminatory laws in particular.

Efforts by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the United Nations to strengthen the implementation of the 1992 Declaration of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious or Linguistic Minorities were summarised in the report (A/HRC/15/42). This report provided a critical overview of the Declaration in various contexts and also described the specific activities of the Office to support and promote its implementation. The analytical report of the Secretary-General (A/HRC/15/43) on the impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights contained summaries of responses from eleven countries. The Council had before it the report of the 17th annual meeting of Special Procedures (A/HRC/15/44) focused on the independence and effectiveness of the Special Procedures, harmonisation and working methods and their approach to the Human Rights Council review. The updated report of the Secretary-General on the comparative summary of existing communications and inquiry process and practices under international human rights instruments and under the United Nations system was under preparation. In June 2010 the Council had held a panel discussion on the protection of journalists in armed conflict (A/HRC/15/54), which took place against the backdrop of alarming reports of killing, harassment, intimidation or kidnapping of journalists in situations of armed conflict. Proceedings from an international workshop on enhancing cooperation between international and regional human rights mechanism were contained in the report (A/HRC/15/56). A draft programme of activities for the International Year for People of African Descent was presented in the report (A/HRC/15/59). During its 12th session on October 2009, the Council requested a report on how to improve conference and secretariat services for the Council. Those were contained in the report (A/HRC/15/17).

Statement by the Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference

EKMELEDDIN IHSANOGLU, Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, said that this fifteenth session of the Human Rights Council was inaugurated at a very critical juncture, when the Council would be reviewing its work and functioning. This session was also coincident with regrettable events that were deliberately meant to defame religions as well as incite hatred, xenophobia, discrimination and violence against religions, in particular Islam. The increasing incidents of violence and discrimination on the basis of religion must not be ignored. The most recent and unfortunate in the series of such events had been the announcement pertaining to “Burn a Koran Day”. It had been highly provocative towards the religious sentiment of Muslims everywhere in the world and had to be condemned in the strongest possible terms. The holy book of Quran had been the last revelation of the Almighty Allah with lofty teachings that had set the principles and guidelines for the human being to manage his behaviour and relationship with himself, with others and with his creator. Islam was a religion that implied peace by its very nomenclature. The Holy Quran spoke of universal peace, security and brotherhood and forbade the killing of innocent human beings and considered murder of an innocent person belonging to any religion, colour or ethnicity as the murder of the entire humanity.


The Organization of the Islamic Conference was deeply concerned that the instances of intolerance, discrimination and acts of violence against followers of certain religions including cases motivated by Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and Christianophobia and discrimination against religious minorities, threatened to impede their full enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms. All xenophobic campaigns of fear mongering and discriminatory measures which restricted, prohibited or discriminated against any religion, such as banning the construction of minarets and organizing events that incited hatred must be strongly condemned by the international community, said Mr. Ihsanoglu. Such acts fuelled discrimination, extremism and misperception leading to polarization and fragmentation with dangerous unintended and unforeseen consequences. The culture of peaceful coexistence and inter-communal and interreligious tolerance that the international community was trying to achieve was under serious threat from extremist fanatics. They had to stand united against such events. The Council must play a key role.

Mr. Ihsanoglu called upon all States to consider taking specific measures aimed at fostering a domestic environment of religious tolerance, respect and peace, including by, inter alia, encouraging the creation of collaborative networks to build mutual understanding; creating appropriate mechanisms within governments to identify and address potential areas of tension; encouraging efforts of community leaders to discuss within their communities causes of discrimination and evolving strategies to counter them; speaking out against intolerance; and adopting measures to criminalize the incitement to imminent violence based on religion. He also called upon the United Nations to support internationally oriented preventive measures to combat negative religious stereotyping and requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to setup an observatory in the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for documenting such acts which led to incitement to religious hatred, hostility and violence.
_________

1Joint statement: International Movement ATD Fourth World, International Council of Women, Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Franciscans International, Association Points-Coeur,
Baha'i International Community, International Commission of Jurists, Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions, World Organization against Torture, Caritas Internationalis (International Confederation of Catholic Charities), Dominicans for Justice and Peace (Order of Preachers), Action Aid International, International Commission of Jurists and International Catholic Child Bureau.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC10/095E