06.05.2004
UN Commission’s 'No-Action' Mechanism Blocking Assessment of Human Rights Violations
NGOs Opposed to Eliminating Commission’s “Most Powerful Enforcement Tool”GENEVA, 6 May 2004 (LWI) – The United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) is becoming “more and more politicized,” blocking the proper examination of human rights situations in specific countries, said Mr Peter Prove, Assistant to the General Secretary for International Affairs and Human Rights of the Lutheran World Federation (LWF).
Prove was commenting on the 60th session of the UNCHR, March 15-April 23 in Geneva. He noted that while there were a number of procedural improvements at this year’s session compared to some of the previous ones, there was a growing negative trend in relation to the examination of specific country situations. Under Item 9 of the Commission, dealing with the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in any part of the world, increasing use is being made of a procedural mechanism known as a “no-action” motion. China and Zimbabwe both succeeded in this tactic to block discussion of proposed resolutions on the human rights situations in those countries. In addition, while a resolution on human rights in Cuba was passed by a narrow margin, Russia managed to fend off a proposed resolution on the human rights situation in Chechnya. “And incredibly,” said Prove, “a mandate on the human rights situation in Iraq was not renewed.”
Prove also noted that a number of States are calling for an end to ‘naming and shaming’ in the Commission on Human Rights, and are now openly proposing that Item 9 of the Commission’s agenda should be dropped altogether. If this item were to be removed, he said, then human rights issues would only be addressed in the context of technical cooperation programs, or in relatively generalized thematic terms. He affirmed that most non-governmental organizations (NGOs) oppose this development. “From the NGOs’ point of view, ‘naming and shaming’ is the only means by which anything like practical enforcement of international human rights law can take place in the case of intransigent State violators of human rights.” Abolishing Item 9, he stressed, “would be getting rid of the Commission’s most powerful enforcement tool.”
Prove remarked on the increasing levels of regional block solidarity in the Commission on Human Rights. The African Group and the EU (European Union) are “particularly clear examples.” Due to regional block voting, according to Prove, “the Commission’s capacity to address country situations is very much reduced.” He observed that the “primary efforts of its members seem to be devoted to defeating proposed resolutions rather than to dealing proactively with serious human rights concerns.”
However, a few country situations were acted on by the Commission. For example, resolutions were adopted on the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and in Turkmenistan. New resolutions on Belarus and North Korea mandated the appointment of Special Rapporteurs on the human rights situations in both countries, and the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Myanmar was extended. A mildly worded decision appointing an Independent Expert on the human rights situation in Sudan for a one-year period was adopted, while a more strongly worded resolution on the topic was deferred.
Among other initiatives, the LWF and five other NGOs presented a joint statement under the agenda item on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination. The six NGOS urged the international human rights community to address caste-based discrimination “because of the deeply entrenched nature of this problem, the enormous numbers of people affected [an estimated 250 million Dalits in South Asia alone] and the global dimensions of the phenomenon.” The Commission, however, did not address this issue.
Other significant developments during the 60th session of the UNCHR included the establishment of a new Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons, especially women and children; the setting up of a new Independent Expert on human rights and counter-terrorism; and the adoption of a resolution on internally displaced persons in which the Commission requested the Secretary-General to establish a mechanism that would address the problem of internal displacement. In addition, the Commission’s Independent Expert on structural adjustment policies and foreign debt was asked to draft general guidelines for “public and private, national and international financial institutions in the decision-making and execution of debt repayments and structural reform programs.”
On April 7, the Commission observed the International Day of Reflection on the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan delivered an address on that occasion that Prove described as “emotional.” (750 words)
A summary report on the 60th session of the Commission on Human Rights will shortly be posted on the LWF Web site at www.lutheranworld.org/What_We_Do/OIAHR/OIAHR-Critical_Issues.html
(773 words)
If you want to edit this article yourself and adapt it to a given format, follow our editing information
