HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PRESS CONFERENCE BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SIXTY-SECOND SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

Manuel Rodríguez Cuadros, Chairman of the sixty-second session of the Commission on Human Rights, held a press briefing at noon today at the Palais des Nations in Geneva on the subject of the Commission’s decision this morning to suspend its work for a week pending consultations in the United Nations General Assembly on the creation of the Human Rights Council to replace the Commission.

The Chairman underscored that in any case the Commission would take up its work again next Monday, 20 March at 10 a.m. The reason for the suspension was to give the extended Bureau and regional groups time to undertake consultations on a programme of work for the Commission according to two different scenarios: the first, if the Human Rights Council were established; the second, if no agreement on the Council were reached. The Chairman stressed that the Commission and its Bureau had decided to hold its regular session regardless of whatever decision was taken in New York. That is, that on 20 March, the Commission would take up its work again for the rest of the present session in the exercise of its mandate and functions with regard to the promotion and protection of human rights.

Responding to one journalist, who characterized the suspension as resembling a “grand farce” and a “grand, very funny theatrical show”, the Chairman noted that the decision to suspend the Commission until 20 March had been a consensus one, as provided for under the rules of procedure. It was not a farce: it was a responsible decision that accorded with the mandate and responsibilities of the Commission, given the exceptional situation created by the ongoing consultations to establish the Council. The motive for the suspension was the need to undertake consultations among countries on the agenda and format of the Commission for the two different scenarios already mentioned. Certainly, the decision to suspend the discussions for a week entailed curtailing the Commission’s session to five weeks, instead of six.

Responding to another question, the Chairman underscored that the responsibility for negotiating a future Human Rights Council was exclusively the province of the General Assembly and not that of the Commission on Human Rights. The Chairman pointed out that the Commission had to wrap up its work in transitioning to the new Council. For that reason, the draft resolution currently under consideration in New York provided for the Council to be up and running about 30 days after the end of the Commission’s session, precisely to avoid any gaps in human rights protection. “For us, it is the victims – and not the bureaucratic process – that is at the root of our approach to human rights”, he said.

Mr. Rodríguez Cuadros felt that a decision was sure to come from New York on Wednesday, 15 March. Following that decision, the Commission would be all the more secure in making its own decision in Geneva, but, basically, the session of the Commission did not depend on the decision made in New York. The format and the agenda, in the event, were tied to the outcome in New York, because, if the Council were established, it would create a new situation. Nevertheless, the Commission would hold its session regardless of what happened in New York, the Chairman insisted. The possible creation of the Council represented an exceptional situation. But the Commission remained an institutional structure with its own mandate. If there were no Council, the Commission would be obliged to hold its session under its rules.

Regarding the work of the Special Rapporteurs of the Commission, the Chairman explained that a decision on that issue would be taken by Member States in consultations this week. For his part, he hoped that the Commission would hear all the Special Rapporteurs and the presentation of all reports under special procedures.

Responding to a question, the Chairman said that six weeks was too little time to accomplish all the work of the Commission. For that reason the draft resolution for the creation of the Council provided for a quasi-permanent organ with three regular sessions a year and the possibility of convoking emergency meetings at any time to respond to urgent human rights cases wherever they presented themselves in the world. However today the situation was exceptional, because the negotiations in New York had not concluded and the responsibilities of the Commission required it to take that exceptional situation into account.