ARMENIAN VICE-FOREIGN MINISTER OUTLINES COUNTRY'S HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD BEFORE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Press Release
HR/CN/765

ARMENIAN VICE-FOREIGN MINISTER OUTLINES COUNTRY'S HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD BEFORE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

(Reproduced as received.)

GENEVA, 14 March (UN Information Service) -- Armenian Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Vartan Oskanian told the Commission on Human Rights this morning that his country had chosen the path of democracy, the rule of law and respect for human life and dignity.

Speaking as the Commission continued to debate the right of peoples to self-determination, the Armenian dignitary evoked the "Karabagh conflict", saying "the population of Nagorno-Karabagh voted overwhelmingly for its own sovereignty". He called on Azerbaijan to release prisoners he said it was holding as a result of the Karabagh conflict.

Also this morning, representatives of all regional groups and a number of individual States paid tribute to the work of the first High Commissioner for Human Rights, José Ayala-Lasso, who is leaving his post to become Ecuador's Foreign Minister. Speakers highlighted among his achievements the number of field activities undertaken under his direction, the restructuring of the Centre for Human Rights and his policy of preventive diplomacy.

In a farewell address, Mr. Ayala-Lasso said the Commission had made progress in the past three years in promoting and protecting human rights. Human rights was "the most noble cause of mankind", he said, adding that it was important to take appropriate actions towards violent and massive breaches of human rights with courage and firmness.

The Commission also continued to discuss the situation in the occupied Arab territories, with the representative of the Russian Federation urging all parties in the Middle East conflict to honour their commitments and establish peace based on the land-for-peace formula. Addressing the other issue on the Commission's agenda for the day, he added that the realization of the right to self-determination must not prejudice the rights and interests of populations that inhabited regions where given ethnic groups were exercising this right.

Also addressing the Commission this morning were the representatives of Algeria, Indonesia, Angola, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Libya, Palestine, Azerbaijan, Iran and Morocco.

The Commission will continue its general debate this afternoon at 3 p.m.

Statement by Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Armenia

VARTAN OSKANIAN, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Armenia, said that at independence, Armenia had chosen the path of democracy, rule of law and respect for human life and dignity. In 1995, Armenia had adopted a constitution confirming the country as a democratic society governed by the rule of law. Armenia had also applied to the Council of Europe in January and received special guest status.

Armenia believed that democracy, human rights and a free market economy should be introduced and upheld, he said. His country had been one of the first Caucasian republics to join the Council of Europe's Venice Commission, which assisted in the development of laws and ensured their compatibility with European norms and standards. Armenia had also been working with experts from the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights.

A healthy economy was essential to ensure the country's physical survival and stability, Mr. Oskanian continued. But Armenia's economic crisis and the Karabagh conflict had produced both refugees and migrants. His Government had accommodated all refugees from Azerbaijan that had entered Armenia in search of security and political freedom. It had also unilaterally returned Azerbaijani prisoners of war in mid-1995. There were no longer any prisoners of war in Armenia; Azerbaijan should do the same.

Armenia's constitution upheld the rights of minorities, said the Vice-Minister. When minorities were not protected adequately, international disturbances, including massive and disorganized emigration as well as outright fighting, were not far behind. The international community ought to address the issue of the suppression of national self-determination as a fundamental human rights violation. He reminded the Commission that the population of Nagorno-Karabagh had overwhelmingly voted for its own sovereignty.

Mr. Oskanian said he wished to remind the Commission that the massacre of one-and-a-half million Armenians by the Ottoman Turks in 1915 was imbedded in the collective memory of the Armenian people. This crime was still unrecognized by the world's governments. While self-determination held an important place on Armenia's agenda, so did genocide prevention and recognition, as this crime went to the very heart of elemental human rights and represented a denial of the right to survival.

- 3 - Press Release HR/CN/765 18 March 1997

Statement by High Commissioner for Human Rights

JOSE AYALA-LASSO, High Commissioner for Human Rights, in a farewell address, said fate was not a matter of chance but of choice; destiny did not imply waiting for something to occur, but rather achieving it. The common destiny of all members of the Commission was the promotion and protection of human rights. In the three years since the international community had paid him the honour of confiding him with the post of High Commissioner, progress had been made on a range of activities aimed at promoting and protecting human rights and fundamental liberties. These activities had included dialogues with States; diplomatic initiatives; promoting the right to development; reinforcing cooperation with United Nations institutions and regional organisations, and instituting more consultations with non-governmental organizations, academic institutions and civil society. In taking up the position of High Commissioner, he continued, he had devoted himself without respite to the cause of human rights, the most noble cause of mankind. It was important to take appropriate actions towards violent and massive breaches of human rights with courage and firmness. In taking leave of the Commission, he wished to quote Martin Luther King: "We are not satisfied until justice rolls down like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream." He was convinced that the next century would be the century of human rights.

Statements BORIS S. KRYLOV (Russian Federation) said that as a co-sponsor of the peace process, the Russian Federation stood for the absolute necessity of observing all concluded agreements and reaching a settlement based on the land-for-peace formula. A complete lifting of the economic blockade of the Palestinian territories would create more favourable conditions for strengthening mutual confidence and fighting the danger of terrorism. The problems of Jerusalem and the settlements had to be solved during negotiations on a commonly acceptable basis. The Russian Federation was worried about the decision of Israel to start a new housing development in East Jerusalem.

Turning to other questions, the delegate said the right of self-determination was one of the most delicate and sensitive questions the international community faced today. There were today extremist manifestations of national self-determination. Such tendencies were characterized by aggressive nationalism and attempts to create mono-ethnic States while discriminating against the population of the non-title nation. The realization of the right to self-determination must not prejudice the rights and interests of a significant part of the population that inhabited the region where the given ethnic group was exercising its right to self-determination.

MOHAMMED HASSAINE (Algeria) said the Madrid Conference on the Middle East in 1991 had laid the groundwork for a continuing peace process and the

- 4 - Press Release HR/CN/765 18 March 1997

achievement of a just and durable peace in the region. The Oslo Agreements had confirmed the desire of both parties to put an end to their confrontation and provided for the implementation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. But the historic advances in the peace process had been compromised by recent developments, including the Israeli decision to build a new Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem; this would disrupt, if not totally block, future negotiations on the final status of the Holy City. As for the exercise of the right of self-determination, he recalled that General Assembly Resolution 1514 adopted in 1960 had enshrined the granting of independence to countries and peoples under colonial domination. But Western Sahara had still not been able to throw off the yoke of colonialism and enjoy independent statehood. In 1988, the joint efforts of the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity had resulted in a settlement plan which envisaged the organization of a fair referendum and, in 1991, the cessation of military actions by the POLISARIO. However, as a result of manoeuvres aimed at delaying the implementation of the plan, little had been achieved since that time.

AGUS TARMIDZI (Indonesia) said his country fully supported the struggle of those in Asia and Africa to end colonial occupation and establish their self-determination. Indonesia supported the Palestinians's right to self-determination and their struggle to retain their territorial integrity. Indonesia itself had suffered from colonialism for 350 years, and still confronted its legacy in the form of ethnic tension from agitators who benefitted from foreign support and intervention. He asked how Portugal could justifiably claim administrative control of East Timor after having deserted it. Portugal had forfeited any right to be considered an administrative power in East Timor, whose people had had a long history of uprisings against Portuguese and Dutch colonizers. As for the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to José Ramos Horta, it was the "ultimate irony" that a man whose hands were stained with blood and whose organization was responsible for atrocities against East Timorese should receive such a prize. Indonesia, for its part, protected the right of the East Timorese and provided them with development in all fields. Indonesia was always prepared to cooperate with the United Nations to find a comprehensive settlement for East Timor through tri-partite negotiations. But any negotiations had to take into account that the decolonization of East Timor had already taken place and that the clock could not be turned back.

ADRIANO PARREIRA (Angola) said the report submitted by the Special Rapporteur on the use of mercenaries had no legal context under the agenda item on the right to self-determination. The Special Rapporteur had exceeded his mandate. He had been requested to collect credible information on the question of the use of mercenaries as a means to impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination. But the communication on the report by the Secretariat to the General Assembly was a gross and misleading interpretation of the report. Angola was one of the first countries to condemn mercenaries in a free and fair open trial, and one of only 21 Member

- 5 - Press Release HR/CN/765 18 March 1997

States to actually have signed the international Convention against the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries adopted by the General Assembly in 1984.

DANILO ROSALES DIAZ (Nicaragua) said his country supported the Palestinians in their struggle to regain their homeland and hoped that peace with dignity could be reached in the region. Without favourable social and economic conditions, economic problems and people who suffered from poverty could become time bombs, turning peace into a vain dream. Israel's repeated closure of the occupied Palestinian territories and other measures against Palestinians were did not help the peace dialogue. Both Israelis and Palestinians must continue and break the ice of distrust. Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories should be accelerated. Nicaragua denounced human rights violations in the occupied territories and terrorism, whatever their source. Nicaragua was concerned about Israel's indefinite administrative detention of Palestinians and its recent decision to allow physical pressure against prisoners. These measures were intolerable. Israel and the Palestinian Authority had to shoulder their historic responsibility and carry out all agreements signed.

BERNARD GOONETILLEKE (Sri Lanka) said the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action adopted at the World Conference on Human Rights in June 1993 in Vienna clearly stated that "all people's have the right of self determination", and that "by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development". Minorities and ethnic groups living in multi-ethnic countries and practising democratic ways of life should be regarded as people who fully enjoyed their right of self-determination. However, some self-seeking individuals and groups had begun to take up the issue as if the principle required further deliberation. As the former Secretary-General had written in his "Agenda for Peace", if every ethnic, religious or linguistic group claimed statehood, there would be no limit to fragmentation and peace, security and economic well-being would be ever more difficult to achieve.

NAJAB AL-HAJJAJI (Libya) said among the measures taken against the Palestinians as listed in the Special Rapporteur's report were the building of settlements and the "Judaization" of Palestinian heritage. The report also said that Israel was carrying out its commitments to peace, but there were violations. The report tried to convince the world that pressure did not succeed with Israel. Libya also found it strange that the report placed the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority on an equal level, given the latter's limited power. Israel enjoyed constant protection while it used all means of terrorism. This explained the veto used by the United States to prevent United Nations denunciation of Israel. The worst thing the Palestinian cause had faced was how the dream of peace had been used as a card in the American presidential elections to attract the vote of the Jewish lobby.

- 6 - Press Release HR/CN/765 18 March 1997

NABIL RAMLAWI (Palestine) said United Nations resolutions since 1947 had affirmed the right of Palestinians to self-determination without foreign intervention. The inalienable right of Palestinians to self-determination constituted the basis for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. The international community had reiterated the right of Palestinians to self-determination because it felt that ignoring such rights would hold the region hostage to bloody wars. The Palestinians could not exercise their right to self-determination while languishing under the yoke of Israeli intervention and occupation. The occupation was a crime against Palestinians and mankind. Any departure by Israel from the agreed peace principles had to be seen as a desire for war and continued violence and bloodshed. The Palestinians would not be dissuaded by any force in the world away from pursuing their rights. The Commission should call on Israel to carry out all United Nations resolutions.

TOFIK MOUSSAEV (Azerbaijan) said too many States interpreted the principle of self-determination to suit their own purposes. In numerous cases, there was discrimination of a majority population group against a minority within the same state. However, certain minorities held provocative attitudes and acted as if they could determine their status by political means. International law stipulated that no one had the right to threaten the sovereignty and territorial integrity of an independent State. International also law did not recognize the granting of self-determination on religious and ethnic grounds.

SIROUS NASSERI (Iran) said Israel's supporters, especially the United States, justified Israeli violations of Palestinian human rights and invoked security reasons and the fragility of the negotiations. They turned a blind eye to atrocities committed by Israel and established a double standard. The peace process from the start had been "an imposition of an unjust and biased formula" on Arab countries and on the Palestinians, who had been pressured to accept it. The policy of the United States and Israel was to end Israel's economic and political isolation at the expense of all legitimate Palestinian and Arab rights. Israel had gone too far with the new settlement in Jerusalem; the United States veto at the Security Council to stop the denunciation of Israel was the latest evidence that the United States was not an honest broker for peace. The situation would continue to deteriorate until Islamic countries joined their political and economic potential to ensure that this humiliating state of affairs was reversed.

NACER BENJELLOUN-TOUIMI (Morocco) said the debate on Western Sahara was a sterile repetition of the debates held at the Fourth Committee of the General Assembly and in the Security Council. With regard to the settlement plan of the United Nations, Morocco's good will was met by prevarication from the other side. All attempts to confuse the issue would be futile. As for the statement of an observer who should remain neutral, certain words were liable to irritate and were not conducive to the restoration of the serenity necessary for a settlement.

* *** *