FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Media Relations
Tel: +41-79-332-8106
Geneva, June 18, 2007 — UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer
issued the following statement today regarding the Human Rights Council
president's text:
Defining the text as a victory, as some have, is possible only by
lowering one's expectations, defined down to reflect the depressing
reality that the current council majority fundamentally opposes the very
concept of human rights scrutiny. Last year's reallotment of Council
seats put the democracies that support human rights mechanisms at a
decided disadvantage. They have been playing defense all year—and most
often losing, often mustering a mere 12 out of 47 seats. Although the
innovation of universal periodic review has positive potential, that was
already established in last year's General Assembly resolution.
The latest package continues the pattern from the past year, solidifying
losses and backsliding on key fronts.
• Contrary to promises made last year by reform proponents that the
new Council would strengthen the independent experts, this package
weakens them in several ways.
• It eliminates the experts on Cuba and Belarus, despite the fact
that both experts have reported on massive, ongoing violations against
journalists and democracy dissidents by both governments.
• As for the experts on other countries—on Burundi, Cambodia, North
Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti, Liberia, Burma, Somalia,
and Sudan—while these are indeed included on a list, these too may soon
be eliminated, as expressly threatened by the Council's majority, under
the "review" process contemplated by the text. (See p. 7 on the power
to "discontinue" mandates.)
• Pending their fate, all rapporteurs will be subject to a new
"Code of Conduct," submitted by Algeria in the name of the African
group, whose only purpose is to intimidate and restrict the independence
of the human rights experts. Its premise throughout is that the experts
are dishonest, for example, the provision about "constantly keeping in
mind their fundamental obligations of truthfulness."
• Contrary to express promises made last year regarding what Kofi
Annan identified as the double standards that plagued the old Commission
on Human Rights, the proposed text features a special agenda item that
places Israel under permanent indictment. No other country in the world
is mentioned in the proposed agenda. This contravenes numerous promises
that were made last year (see, e.g., UNDPI document) that the new agenda
would not have an agenda item "targeting Israel" and instead begin with
a "clean slate." The text also treats Israel differently in exempting
its investigative mandate on Israeli actions from the one-year term
limit and regular review that applies to all other geographic mandates.
This subverts the Council's stated principles of non-selectivity,
universality, and impartiality and damages its credibility from the start.
In sum, the universal periodic review remains the only positive
innovation from the Commission, but even then, the proposed procedures
are hardly encouraging. First, the review will occur only once every
four years. If a Tiananmen Square massacre occurs, the victims will
need to wait up to four years for redress. Second, the duration of the
review—for China as for every other country—is limited to a mere 3
hours. Third, the process itself, the proposal takes pains to
emphasize, is a "cooperative mechanism," with the country reviewed
"fully involved in the outcome." There is minimal participation of
substance from experts or independent voices. Translation: it's largely
toothless.
That the West managed to save some of the key mechanisms established
under the Commission—such as the right to address emerging situations—is
important, but hardly a victory to be proud of for a body heralded as
the dawn of a new era.
Copyright mediaforfreedom.com
http://www.mediaforfreedom.com/ReadArticle.asp?ArticleID=585
No comments:
Post a Comment