HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS GENERAL SEGMENT

The Human Rights Council this afternoon held its General Segment.

Speakers disapproved of and discouraged the elevation of some rights above others, and the obvious self-interest displayed by some States in advancing their own agendas at the Human Rights Council. They said the Council’s agenda was inundated and not sustainable. As a result, States were not able to attend to the issues with the necessary attention and detail. Innovative solutions for streamlining the Council’s agenda had to be found. Other speakers stressed the importance of addressing the threat of terrorism, climate change and natural disasters, the ongoing refugee and migrant crisis, as well as human rights situations in specific countries. It was noted that good laws and effective institutions could transform societies, especially when they were accompanied by the empowerment of citizens and the full participation of civil society. The rule of law provided not only certainty and predictability, but also substantive justice.

Civil society representatives noted that the vulnerability of migrants and refugees was exacerbated by the proliferation of xenophobic narratives and hate speech. Displacement was largely generated by armed conflicts, foreign military interventions, massive international sales of arms, and foreign support to armed groups. Those challenges needed to be addressed through effective and human rights-based responses. Concerns were voiced that the civil society sector was becoming the target of a concerted global campaign to restrict civic space. The persecution of human rights defenders and journalists appeared to have increased, and restrictions on international funding of civil society organizations were a matter of deep concern. The Council should condemn acts of reprisals.

Speaking in the General Segment were: China, Lao People’s Democratic Republic on behalf of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Ethiopia, Namibia, Côte d’Ivoire, India, El Salvador, Timor Leste on behalf of the Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries, Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Gulf Cooperation Council, Iceland, Syria, Turkmenistan, Nepal, Pakistan, Malaysia, Belarus, Bahamas, Uzbekistan, Croatia, Mozambique, Estonia, Oman, Fiji, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Azerbaijan and Yemen. International Development Law Organization also took the floor.

Representatives of national human rights institutions and civil society also spoke. Taking the floor were: International Coordinating Committee of National Human Rights Institutions, and civil society representatives Patrick Taran, Mandeep Tiwana, Flavio Luiz Schieck Valente, and Snaliah Mahal in a video statement.

Speaking in a right of reply following the General Segment were Saudi Arabia, Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The Council will next meet on Thursday, 3 March, at 9 a.m. when it will hold a panel discussion on climate change and the right to health, followed by an interactive clustered dialogue with the Special Rapporteurs for the environment and adequate housing.

General Segment

China said that the world was still plagued by conflict and poverty. The Human Rights Council was undermined by politicisation and double standards, and used human rights to interfere in the sovereignty of other countries. All human rights were intrinsically rooted in the values and principles of countries, and all States, big or small, rich or poor, were equal members of the international community. There was more than one way to govern a State. The wishes of the people on the ground were essential.

Lao People’s Democratic Republic, speaking on behalf of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, reaffirmed the Association’s commitment to its Charter as well as the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. In 2015 the Association’s Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights had successfully implemented its five-year work plan, and it had undertaken various initiatives to promote and raise awareness of human rights in the region.

Ethiopia said that in developing nations, most children were enrolled in primary schools, great progress had been made in health and related areas, and the goals of reducing poverty by half had been met. Creating an enabling environment for the better implementation of the Sustainable Development Agenda 2030 was a critical development process that required efforts more than ever before. Ethiopia supported the Human Rights Council, but there were areas that needed improvement, including de-politicization.

Namibia disapproved of and discouraged the elevation of some rights above others, and the obvious self-interest displayed by some States in advancing their own agendas at the Human Rights Council. The Council’s agenda was inundated and not sustainable. As a result, States were not able to attend to the issues with the needed attention and detail. Innovative solutions for streamlining the Council’s agenda had to be found.

Côte d’Ivoire stressed the importance of addressing the threat of terrorism, the migration crisis, climate change and natural disasters. Côte d’Ivoire was focused on creating social and political stability as the pillars of sustainable development. Its concrete actions towards the reduction of poverty were in the area of women’s rights and the promotion of gender equality in political, economic and social domains, as well as in the empowerment of youth.

India expressed serious concern about the ongoing refugee and migrant crisis and called on the international community to outlaw terrorism and delegitimize it as a tool for politics. Human rights should be respected while undertaking counter-terrorist measures. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development provided an important opportunity for all countries to jointly address the common challenges of sustainable development, with the right to development as its pillar.

El Salvador said that every nation was facing different challenges, and each had age-old histories and different historical processes which enriched the international community. Expressing concern for the human rights situation of migrants, particularly unaccompanied children and adolescents, he said that El Salvador had drawn attention to the desirability of discussing that matter in the Council.

Timor Leste, speaking on behalf of the Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries, said that a resolution adopted in 2003 on Human Rights and the Abolition of the Death Penalty was one of the fundamental texts of the Community and expressed its commitment to make every effort toward the universal abolition of capital punishment, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The Community also reiterated the importance of the human right to adequate food and deepened efforts to ensure food security in its Member States.

Organization of Islamic Cooperation expressed worry about the refugee crisis as well as the situation of the Palestinian and Kashmiri peoples. The suffering of the Syrian people was also of concern, as was the situation of the Rohingya population in Myanmar. The Organization condemned the “Khojaly genocide” which was perpetrated against civilians by Armenia in the occupied Nagorno-Karabakh region of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Gulf Cooperation Council shared the objectives and lofty ideas of protecting and promoting human rights. The Gulf Cooperation Council countries had endorsed the principle of cooperation in order to serve the noble objectives and values deeply rooted in Islam. Many measures had been undertaken to promote human rights, including the ratification of international agreements. Priority had been given to national human rights institutions and civil rights organizations.

Iceland agreed with the deep concerns expressed by the High Commissioner regarding the dramatic increases in violations of international human rights law and humanitarian law. Gender equality and women’s empowerment had long been a cornerstone of Iceland’s foreign policy. New approaches were needed, including creating a space where men could talk about their own role in advancing gender equality and eliminating gender stereotypes.

Syria said that major challenges, including polarization, still prevailed in the human rights system. The world was still far from achieving mutual respect and valuing particularities. Dual standards and selectivity prevailed and opened the door to violations of human rights. Several countries persisted in slandering others and using the Human Rights Council as a pretext. Some of them, such as Saudi Arabia, had a record of committed atrocities. Values were motivated by petrol dollars. Impartiality and independence had to be shown.

Turkmenistan said that it attached great importance to the work of the Human Rights Council for the promotion and protection of human rights. Domestically, Turkmenistan was intensifying its efforts aimed at implementing its international human rights obligations, including through the recent adoption of a National Human Rights Action Plan for 2016-2020, comprehensive legal reforms, and discussions on a new Constitution that would pay special attention to political, economic and social rights and freedoms.

Nepal underlined its commitment to collaborate with the Human Rights Council and the Universal Periodic Review, during which it had accepted 152 out of the 195 recommendations made to it. Nepal had promulgated a new federal Constitution in September 2015, which aimed at establishing peace, justice, equality and universal democratic values, and ensured the end of all forms of discrimination. Nepal would take adequate and additional measures for the respect and promotion of human rights.

Pakistan reaffirmed the Government’s commitment to promote and protect women’s rights, including through the Punjab Protection of Women against Violence Act. Further, Pakistan had recently launched a National Action Plan on Human Rights, which would be implemented through legal reforms, funds for free legal aid to victims, guidelines for combatting gender-based violence, and the establishment of a National Commission for Children. Pakistan would seek membership of the Council for the term 2018-2020.

Malaysia observed an unprecedented exodus of people fleeing conflict, noting that while the push factors for the migration crisis were obvious, the solutions were not. Malaysia had pledged to accept 3,000 Syrian refugees in the next three years. The Government of Malaysia was concerned about the increasing hard-line measures taken by some destination countries and the increasing rhetoric that promoted racism, discrimination and Islamophobia. It rejected the association of terrorism with any race, religion, or culture.

Belarus voiced its support for the principles of equal dialogue, rejection of double standards and the equal treatment of all human rights as the pillars of the work of the Human Rights Council, through the Universal Periodic Review. Politicized country mandates were pointless. The mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Belarus had the sole purpose of undermining the Government of Belarus.

International Development Law Organization noted that good laws and effective institutions could transform societies, especially when they were accompanied by the empowerment of citizens and the full participation of civil society. The rule of law provided not only certainty and predictability, but also substantive justice. The Universal Periodic Review would continue to be crucial in guiding national efforts to address gaps in the progressive realization of human rights for all.

Bahamas said that one success story of the Council was the establishment of the Voluntary Technical Assistance Trust Fund to support the participation of least developed countries and small island developing States in the work of the Human Rights Council. Bahamas had benefited from that programme. There could be no economic and social development without gender equality and the empowerment of women, which also hinged on engaging men and boys.

Uzbekistan said that Uzbekistan had achieved the Millennium Development Goals, including reaching literacy levels that were the highest in the world. Today the focus remained on unprecedented problems of climate change. The Aral Sea was a particular tragedy, and it was Uzbekistan’s hope that in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals, the Aral catastrophe would be taken into account.

Croatia said that the ongoing conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Libya, South Sudan and Ukraine, as well as violence committed in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Iran, Burundi and Eritrea clearly demonstrated how seriously human rights were being violated in different parts of the world. Noting also ongoing political changes in Myanmar, she added concern about the situation in Ukraine. Croatia was a country of transit in the migration crisis, and the Council had to play a role in reinforcing migrants’ protection.

Mozambique expressed concerns that many people were being deprived of their human rights as a result of violent conflicts, and commended the engagement of United Nations agencies in addressing the needs of those seeking refuge. Mozambique had recently acceded to additional international human rights instruments, and had launched an initiative, in partnership with civil society, which would result in the production of a national action plan on business and human rights.

Estonia said that it had just concluded its first three-year membership of the Human Rights Council, and went through a second Universal Periodic Review in January. Throughout its membership, Estonia had abided by clear priorities, including freedom of expression, the rights of women and children, the rights of indigenous peoples, respect for the rule of law, democracy and support to civil society.

Oman regretted the politicization of human rights issues within the Council, and underlined the importance of more transparency and more respect among States. The Universal Periodic Review was the appropriate mechanism to raise human rights concerns. The particular situation of developing countries also had to be taken into account, through the realization of the right to development. Also, greater emphasis should be put on security, without which human rights could not be realized.

Fiji said that Fiji was in the process of signing and ratifying the Convention against Torture and was also considering a national Bill on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Having registered her country’s intention to stand for membership of the Council in 2018, she noted that no Pacific island country had ever been a member of the Council, and that Pacific island States were often neither seen nor heard in Geneva and New York.

Tajikistan said that increasing armed conflicts and terrorist acts, pollution, climate change, and infectious diseases influenced human rights, requiring the coordination of the efforts of the whole international community to confront the risks. An essential part of the struggle against terrorism was the prevention of the illegal narcotics trade. At the same time, it was necessary to seek ways to reduce the costs of globalization.

Tunisia stressed the need for impartiality and total integrity for human rights defenders because independence was an essential foundation. Human rights were indivisible, and it was important to opt for an approach which did not stop at the national level, but was based on national cooperation and the interdependence of challenges. He recalled the importance of coordination under the aegis of the Council.

Azerbaijan pointed out that the ongoing military occupation by Armenia of almost 20 per cent of Azerbaijan’s territory and its grave consequences continued to pose a major obstacle for the full provision of human rights in Azerbaijan. Implementing the relevant United Nations resolutions of 1993, ending the occupation and ensuring the return of refugees and internally displaced persons were essential elements for peace, security and the rights of victims.

Yemen emphasized that dialogue was the only response to deal with international problems. The two Covenants on human rights had marked a turning point in the field of human rights, whereas the creation of the Human Rights Council 10 years ago was the most audacious decision of the international community. The ongoing conflict in Yemen, which began in 2011, could be resolved by the return of the legitimate Government to power.

International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights said that the vulnerability of migrants and refugees was exacerbated by the proliferation of xenophobic narratives and hate speech. Displacement was largely generated by armed conflicts. Those challenges needed to be addressed through effective and human rights-based responses.

PATRICK TARAN, Civil Society Representative, said that, at a time when migration had become central to development, the world was adopting the wrong approach to migration and human rights. Increased migration was a consequence of foreign military interventions, massive international sales of arms, and foreign support to armed groups. Human rights violations against migrants were undermining the human rights regime.

MANDEEP TIWANA, Civil Society Representative, was concerned that the civil society sector was becoming the target of a concerted global campaign to restrict civic space. The persecution of human rights defenders and journalists appeared to have increased, and restrictions on international funding of civil society organizations were a matter of deep concern. The Council should condemn acts of reprisals.

FLAVIO LUIZ SCHIECK VALENTE, Civil Society Representative, said on behalf of FIAN International that his organization was extremely concerned about the systematic and brutal pattern of evictions, destruction of livelihoods and violations of human rights of indigenous peoples, peasants, fisher folk, agricultural workers and other small-scale food producers. Emerging hierarchies between investors’ rights and human rights were deeply concerning.

SNALIAH MAHAL, Civil Society Representative, said that her country, Saint Lucia, along with other small island States in the Caribbean and Pacific region, were at the forefront of the battle on climate change, which was a real threat to their existence. She called on the Council to make climate change and its human rights consequences a high priority.

Right of Reply

Saudi Arabia, speaking in a right of reply, rejected the allegations of human rights violations in Saudi Arabia which had been made by the delegation of the “regime of Bashar Al-Assad.”

Armenia, speaking in a right of reply, rejected the allegations made by the delegation of Azerbaijan, clarifying that the refugee problem had occurred as the result of the legitimate fight of the people of Nagorno-Karabakh for their self-determination. The provisions for the return of refugees were among the basic principles for the settlement of the conflict, which Azerbaijan had refused to respect.

Azerbaijan, speaking in a right of reply, clarified that the Minsk Group was not the sole group at the negotiations. Armenia had never implemented the United Nations resolutions of 1993. Those resolutions were explicit about the occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh by Armenia and about the return of refugees. In 1988 Azerbaijanis were expelled from Nagorno-Karabakh and none of them lived in that region any more.

Armenia, speaking in a second right of reply, said that Azerbaijan had been in violation of Security Council resolutions since their adoption. Armenia had taken steps to support refugees. Azerbaijan’s human rights record was appalling.

Azerbaijan, speaking in a second right of reply, said that Armenia had many problems in the field of human rights, and that there were well-documented figures on the number of refugees in the region, which spoke for themselves.


For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC16/010E