HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS GENERAL DEBATE ON HUMAN RIGHTS BODIES AND MECHANISMS

The Human Rights Council this morning held a general debate on human rights bodies and mechanisms after hearing a presentation of the annual report of the Forum on Minority Issues by Rita Izsak, Special Rapporteur on minority issues, and a presentation of the report of the Annual Meeting of Special Procedures by Michael Addo, Chairperson of the Coordination Committee of Special Procedures.

Ms. Izsak said that the Forum on Minority Issues had focused its eighth annual session on “Minorities in the criminal justice system”, with enriching discussions leading to a comprehensive set of recommendations. The Forum had called on States to ensure that all individuals within their jurisdiction enjoyed their fundamental rights throughout the criminal justice system, including through measures that specifically promoted the equal treatment of minorities, legislation prohibiting and punishing racial profiling, training of officials and prison personnel on human rights and minority rights, and the collection and analysis of data and studies on minorities in the justice system.

Mr. Addo said that the Coordination Committee of Special Procedures had continued to facilitate dialogue and provide guidance on issues relating to the independence of Special Procedures and the code of conduct. It had enhanced its outreach with the United Nations counterparts. Special Procedures were essential tools towards ending impunity, they contributed to the identification of early warning signs of human rights violations and helped prevent or respond to serious human rights violations. Reprisals against those cooperating with Special Procedures, the lack of resources, and the lack of cooperation from States were challenges.

During the general debate on human rights bodies and mechanisms, speakers underscored the important role of the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council for the promotion and protection of human rights, and encouraged strengthened support and cooperation with mandate holders, including through accepting requests for country visits, responding to communications and providing adequate financial support. Several States stressed the importance of the independence of the mandate holders, while others insisted that they had to abide by their code of conduct. Speakers strongly condemned acts of reprisals against those seeking to collaborate with the Special Procedure, as well as violence against mandate holders themselves.

On minority issues, speakers raised alleged cases of discrimination and violence against minorities in a number of countries. They welcomed the work of the Forum on Minority Issues, and encouraged it to work more towards the dissemination of its recommendations and their mainstreaming throughout the United Nations system.

Speaking during the general debate were Netherlands on behalf of the European Union, Uruguay on behalf of a cross-regional group of 44 countries, Venezuela, Russian Federation, Cuba, China, Belgium, Ghana, Tunisia, Spain, Gulf Cooperation Council, Iran, Pakistan, Austria and Republic of Moldova.

The following non-governmental organizations also spoke: Alliance Defending Freedom, International Service for Human Rights, Friends World Committee for Consultation Quakers, Agence Internationale pour le Développement, Minority Rights Groups, World Barua Organizations, International Association of Democratic Lawyers, Canners International Permanent Committee, World Muslim Congress, International Islamic Federation of Student Organizations, Centre for Human Rights and Peace Advocacy, Khiam Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Torture, Organization for Defending Victims of Violence, Americans for Democracy and Human Rights, Alsalam Foundation, Iraqi Development Organization, Centre for Environmental and Management Studies, European Union of Public Relations, Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, Pan African Union for Science and Technology, Commission africaine des promoteurs de la santé et des droits de l’Homme, World Jewish Congress and Global Network for Rights and Development.

The Council will next meet at 11 a.m. to consider the Universal Periodic Review outcomes of Micronesia, Lebanon, Mauritania and Nauru. At 3 p.m., it will consider the Universal Periodic Review outcomes of Rwanda, Nepal and Austria.

Documentation

The Council has before it the report of the Forum on Minority Issues (A/HRC/31/72).

The Council has before it the annual report of the special procedures (A/HRC/31/79).

The Council has before it the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the twenty-second annual meeting of special rapporteurs/representatives, independent experts and working groups of the special procedures of the Human Rights Council, including updated information on the special procedures (A/HRC/31/39).

The Council has before it the progress report of the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee on its research-based report on the activities of vulture funds and the impact on human rights (A/HRC/31/67).

Presentation of Reports on the Forum on Minority Issues and on the Special Procedures

RITA IZSAK, Special Rapporteur on minority issues, presenting the report of the Forum on Minority Issues, said that the Forum had successfully conducted its eighth annual session on 24 and 25 November 2015 with the thematic focus on minorities in the criminal justice system, and with more than 500 participants from across the globe. The Forum during this session considered four thematic areas in detail. First, participants discussed the legal framework and key concepts relevant to the promotion and protection of minority rights in the criminal justice system. Second, participants discussed key factors of vulnerability of minority groups and their exposure to arbitrary or discriminatory exercise of police powers. The third agenda item focused on specific challenges that minorities faced in criminal judicial proceedings, including obstacles to realizing their rights to equality before the law, to non-discrimination and to fair trial. Fourth, the Forum discussed actual and potential barriers to combatting discrimination against minorities in the criminal justice system and stressed the need for the collection and analysis of comprehensive and disaggregated data at each stage of the criminal process. The enriching discussions around these thematic areas had led to a comprehensive set of recommendations.

The Forum first called on States to ensure that all individuals within their jurisdiction, and regardless of the criminal law or procedures followed, enjoyed their fundamental rights throughout the criminal justice system, including through measures that specifically promoted the equal treatment of minorities. The collection and analysis of data and studies was instrumental to combatting discrimination. States should enact legislation explicitly, prohibiting and punishing the questioning, searching and arrest of individuals based solely or primarily on their physical appearance or perceived membership to a minority. States should also ensure that members of minorities were fully informed, including in their own language, of their rights as offenders, and that complaints by members of the most vulnerable populations were pursued with the same diligence applied to others. Other recommendations focused on minorities in detention facilities, including the prevention of and prosecution of acts of violence, harassment and abuse by prison staff; the provision of competent legal assistance to members of minorities; and the need for compulsory training, education and capacity building of law enforcement and judicial officials in human rights and minority rights.

MICHAEL ADDO, Chairperson of the Coordination Committee of Special Procedures, presented the report of the twenty-second annual meeting of Special Procedures, including updated information on what Special Procedures had done in 2015. The factsheet provided contained information such as the number of mandate holders, the composition of the Special Procedures system, the number of visits conducted, the number of communications sent, the number of reports presented and the number of press releases issued. The report also showed that mandate holders worked increasingly together. In 2015 steps had been taken to consolidate the role of the Committee as the main body coordinating, representing and acting on behalf of Special Procedures. The Coordination Committee had strengthened its capacity to advise and support mandate holders, including by expanding its meeting time to respond to the increasing demands of an expanding Special Procedures system. The Committee’s interface towards the Human Rights Council had been consolidated, and the Committee had also continued to facilitate dialogue and provide guidance on issues relating to the independence of Special Procedures and the code of conduct, as part of the internal advisory procedure. Finally, the Coordination Committee had enhanced its outreach with the United Nations counterparts and had addressed issues related to human rights mainstreaming and the Human Rights Up Front initiative with various high-level United Nations representatives, including the Secretary-General and the Deputy Secretary-General. Special Procedures were essential tools towards ending impunity, but much more needed to be done to ensure consistent follow-up. More mandate holders undertook follow-up activities. However, the implementation of recommendations was primarily the responsibility of States that should give the same attention to recommendations stemming from all human rights mechanisms.

Mr. Addo welcomed the initiatives taken by some States to establish national mechanisms to follow up on all recommendations and he called on other States to adopt that approach. He also called on States to share more systematically information on measures taken to implement human rights recommendations with the Council. Engagement and collaboration with other parts of the United Nations system was another priority because Special Procedures could not work in isolation. Information from Special Procedures contributed to the identification of early warning signs of human rights violations, and action by Special Procedures could help prevent or respond to serious human rights violations. Some of the challenges that the Coordination Committee faced included intimidation and reprisals against those cooperating with the United Nations, including Special Procedures. There was also the continued lack of adequate resources for Special Procedures, which was another challenge; Mr. Addo thanked Member States for their financial contributions. Another serious and continued challenge was the lack of cooperation or selective cooperation from States. The fact that a number of mandate holders had again become the subject of public and hominem attacks for carrying out their work was another serious concern. Mr. Addo noted that while the Coordination Committee did not expect Member States to always agree with mandate holders’ assessment, it did expect them to engage on the substance of the matter, rather than on the reputation of the messenger.

General Debate on Human Rights Bodies and Mechanisms

Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said over the past 10 years, the Council had played a key role in monitoring human rights and in calling for accountability for the perpetrators of violations. The European Union stressed the importance of the independence of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and continued to remain aware of its budgetary constraints. The Special Procedures were one of the most important mechanisms of the Council. Civil society groups played a vital role in the work of the Council, the European Union said, reaffirming its strong opposition to reprisals.

Uruguay, speaking on behalf of a cross-regional group of 44 countries, reaffirmed support to the Special Procedures of the Council, and welcomed work done by the Coordination Committee to increase coordination, raise awareness and act as the main interlocutor of the system. The Group strongly rejected any act of intimidation and reprisal against those cooperating with Special Procedures, and stressed that attacks against mandate holders themselves were unacceptable and unjustifiable. Uruguay called upon States to cooperate with Special Procedures, accept their visit requests and respond to their communications.

Venezuela said there was an imbalance in priorities, and the Office of the High Commissioner was urged to support all mandate holders from the ordinary budget. Venezuela also supported a more balanced makeup of personnel in the Office of the High Commissioner to ensure regional and gender representation. Hasty value judgments presented without verifying facts should be avoided, and mandate holders were encouraged to show due respect and cooperation with States.

Russian Federation addressed minority issues and the justice system, noting that the Russian Federation guaranteed the rights of minorities in judicial procedures, but adding that unfortunately, the question of minorities in the criminal justice was the object of serious problems where law enforcement subjected citizens to profiling on the basis of race, ethnic, and cultural features. That was commonplace in many places, and
States should identify underlying reasons for that.

Cuba said that country specific mandates established against the will of States were based on selectivity and double standards. Countries had every right to decide whether or not to cooperate with mandates. Each procedure was created with a specific mandate, which should not pressure countries into cooperation with Special Rapporteurs without their consent. Special Procedures should not try to operationalize something Member States had not agreed on, especially when it was controversial.

China emphasized the constructive role of Special Procedures in the promotion of human rights. It expected all Special Procedures to strictly follow their mandate and promote dialogue. The selection of mandate holders should follow gender and geographical balance. China guaranteed the rights of minorities, including through the Criminal Procedures Law that guaranteed the use of languages of minorities in legal procedures. It had enhanced legal aid to ethnic minorities and provided it to them in their languages.

Belgium called on all States to cooperate fully with Special Procedures, in particular by accepting their requests for visits and allowing them full access to their territory, by responding to their communications, and by following up on their recommendations. It encouraged the Coordination Committee to increase coordination with a view to joint activities and statements on country specific situations. It expressed concern over the acts of intimidation and reprisal against those cooperating with Special Procedures, which had not only continued with impunity, but had also become increasingly severe in nature.

Ghana noted in particular the solution proposed by the Forum on Minority Issues on the importance of States to ensure full compliance with international human rights standards, especially guarantees of fair trial by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal, respect for the rule of law, equality before the law, and effective access to justice and due process. Ghana urged all Special Procedures to stick to the code of conduct, such as ensuring that concerned States were given adequate opportunity to make factual corrections to comments.

Tunisia reiterated its support to the Special Procedures and the role they played in promoting human rights, carrying out country visits and providing technical assistance. Tunisia called on the Council to support Special Procedures through adequate financing and through efforts to combat reprisals. For its part, Tunisia had received 13 country visits within the last five years, and would receive two more in 2016. Tunisia really appreciated their inputs, and had established a national inter-ministerial mechanism to elaborate and present reports to treaty bodies.

Spain said that the independence of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was essential, and should not be endangered by the Council. Independence was also the central point of Special Procedures. Mandate holders’ dialogue with the Council was crucial to ensure transparency. Spain underlined the crucial role played by civil society in promoting human rights at the United Nations - and at the national level - and opposed any kind of reprisals or attacks against them.

Gulf Cooperation Council underscored the important role played by the Special Procedures for the protection of human rights in keeping within their mandate and fulfilling their code of conduct. It underlined the importance of achieving geographical balance in the appointment of Special Procedures, while regretting the lack of mandate holders from Arab countries and the lack of gender equality.

Iran spoke about the situation of minorities and their rights domestically, noting that in Iran, Christians had 250 churches, Jews had 16 synagogues, and Zoroastrians had 78 places of worship. There were 58 associations for religious minorities. Minorities had more than 20 journals and five publishing centres, and 500 books had been published by them in the past decade. Out of 290 Members of Parliament, five seats were always allocated to minorities. In Iran, nobody was persecuted due to specific beliefs.

Pakistan said minorities enriched the diversity of Pakistan, adding that the Constitution guaranteed equal rights to all citizens. Specific measures aiming to establish an inclusive society with all people living in harmony included the criminalization of hate speech and incitement to hatred which led to violence. Thousands of cases had been registered against individuals and entities involved in hate crimes, and action was being taken against them.

Austria said that the unequal treatment of minorities occurred at every stage of the criminal justice process, starting from disproportionate targeting and ill-treatment by police and other law enforcement officials. Overcoming such challenges required a minority rights based approach which ensured the effective participation of minorities in all aspects of the criminal justice process and administration of justice. The objective of all ways of addressing challenges faced by minorities should be their integration into society.

Republic of Moldova spoke about the issue of working methods of the Council, noting that the unsustainable increase of the programme of work of the Council prevented the full participation in meetings and restricted interested delegations in their ability to take the floor, thereby undermining the quality of outcome and the principle of inclusiveness. Implementation of decisions would be strengthened by a coherent and systematic approach which avoided duplication and fragmentation of human rights issues.

Alliance Defending Freedom voiced concern over the fact that no adequate efforts had been taken to protect persons belonging to religious minorities in the Middle East, especially Christians, Arameans and Yazidis. It called on the High Commissioner to recognize those crimes as genocide and take steps to refer the situation in the Middle East to the attention of the International Criminal Court.

International Service for Human Rights reiterated the call for a speedy establishment of the United Nations focal point for reprisals. It called on China to update the Council on the investigation of the death of human rights defenders, and it expressed concern over continued attacks on human rights defenders in various countries.

Friends World Committee for Consultation Quakers drew attention to the impact of discriminatory treatment that affected the rights of minority children, who as a result were disproportionately affected by parental incarceration. It called on States to protect and uphold the rights of affected children by taking into account the best interests of the child in all decision-making processes related to their parents.

Agence Internationale pour le Développement said that field visits by Special Procedures were very important, and expressed deep concerns about acts of reprisals against individuals cooperating with United Nations human rights mechanisms and about rights violations in Kashmir.

Minority Rights Groups said that the Forum on Minority Issues should continue to grow and be a platform for exchange between minority rights representatives, including those without ECOSOC status, and States and Experts. The Forum must also work more towards the dissemination of its recommendations and their mainstreaming throughout the United Nations system.

World Barua Organizations referred to discrimination against Dalits in India, particularly throughout the education system, and called on the Council and other human rights mechanisms to come to help minority students facing violent treatment at the hand of upper caste Hindu teachers.

International Association of Democratic Lawyers, in a joint statement with the Europe-Third World Centre, spoke about the situation of the Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, who was said to be arbitrarily deprived of his liberty by Sweden and the United Kingdom. Western countries applied double standards when it came to human rights.

Canners International Permanent Committee spoke about the situation of the Ahmadi community in Pakistan, whose discrimination was said to start at birth and continue until death. The fate of Yazidis in Syria was even worse, as the community had borne the brunt of the intolerant extremist regime.

World Muslim Congress said the Indian Government had failed to improve respect for religious freedom, protect the rights of women and children, and end abuses against marginalized communities. Rape victims in Kashmir sought justice, Muslims had been killed by Hindu vigilante groups, and churches were attacked in several states in 2015.

International Islamic Federation of Student Organizations noted that reprisals against human rights defenders had no end in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir. Restrictions on the right to freedom of expression or the media were not a new occurrence. Security forces and intelligence agencies hauled journalists for covering activities of political opposition leaders.

Centre for Human Rights and Peace Advocacy informed the Human Rights Council on the situation on minorities in India, which was alarming. It presented the case of small farmers in Punjab who had been harassed by the administration. Water was diverted from their lands and they were heavily indebted. It called on the Human Rights Council to create a mandate on their situation.

Khiam Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Torture noted that in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries human rights defenders were exposed to harassment and retaliation. Despite the United Nations declaration, Bahrain detained important Shia leaders. The organization thus appealed to the Human Rights Council to adopt a resolution to protect the work of human rights defenders.

Organization for Defending Victims of Violence raised attention on under-representation and discrimination against Shia Muslims in the justice system in Saudi Arabia. The Forum on Minority Issues should study these cases and offer practical recommendations.

Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain said that Bahrain had failed to cooperate with the Special Procedures of the Council. It noted specifically Bahrain’s failure to respond to communications by the United Nations Working Group on arbitrary detention and the Special Rapporteur on torture.

Alsalam Foundation noted human rights violations in Bahrain by security forces against peaceful protestors. Perpetrators had never been prosecuted, and the Council should call for accountability.

Iraqi Development Organization, speaking in a joint statement, recommended that Member States of the Council, in which human rights violations were systemic to their governance structure, were moved to a lower level of membership or removed so that they could not perform the same roles as full Members of the Council.

Centre for Environmental and Management Studies said that the Pashtun minority in Pakistan faced severe and harsh living conditions. The international community was requested to help try those responsible, including the Army High Command which had ordered a massacre of Pashtun civilians, before the International Criminal Court.

European Union of Public Relations said that the Ahmadi community in Pakistan was subject to racial discrimination. The Houthis in Yemen, who wanted to rid Yemen of ISIS and Al Qaeda, had been targeted by “IS”; the extremist Sunni jihadi group considered Shiites as heretics and had frequently targeted them in attacks in several countries.

Commission to Study the Organization of Peace reminded of the institutional discrimination of religious minority groups and minority Muslim sects in Pakistan. Discrimination in law and practice was still witnessed, notably through a separate list for Ahmadi voters, the absence of codified personal law for Hindus and Sikhs, and the lack of effective representation of religious minority groups.

Pan African Union for Science and Technology drew attention to the suffering of minorities in Pakistan, where the Shia minority was subject to the worst forms of human rights abuse at the hands of the Pakistani army, as well as the extremist Sunni terror groups which enjoyed full patronage of the army and the political class. It also reminded of the persecution of Christians in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Commission africaine des promoteurs de la santé et des droits de l’homme noted that women in Kashmir had suffered enormously since the current phase of the struggle for self-determination. Women had borne the brunt of the violence in the United Nations recognized disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir, and the Human Rights Council was urged to take measures to protect the rights of women there.

World Jewish Congress regretted that the issue of hate crime was not adequately addressed in the report of the Forum on Minority Issues, and the failure of criminal justice systems to address this.

Global Network for Rights and Development drew the Council’s attention to the intensive discriminatory behaviour against 1.3 million Rohingya people, who daily faced systematic violence and persecution from the Government of Myanmar.



For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC16/034E