HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION CONCLUDES DEBATE ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS
Press Release
HR/CN/773
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION CONCLUDES DEBATE ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS
19970321 (Reproduced as received.)GENEVA, 19 March (UN Information Service) -- The implementation of economic, social and cultural rights for people worldwide was the joint responsibility of developed and developing nations, country representatives and non-governmental organizations told the Commission on Human Rights this afternoon.
As it rounded up its debate on economic, social and cultural rights and the right to development, the Commission heard the representative of Colombia stress that the participation of all in economic, social, cultural and political development was necessary to ensure world peace. Colombia sought to encourage dialogue between industrialized and developing countries to establish such rights.
The representative of the Republic of Korea, meanwhile, decried the lack of commitment towards the effective implementation of those rights and warned that the promotion of civil and political rights at the expense of economic, social and cultural rights was dangerous.
Mexico and Argentina said it was time to fulfil the right to development for all countries. Economic growth could only materialize with the strengthening of human rights, the Argentinian delegate added.
For the representative of Egypt, the implementation of the right to development was a duty for all the international community and should be based on a cooperative basis guaranteeing mutual respect. That view was echoed by the representative of Iran and non-governmental organizations. Costa Rica also took the floor during the discussion.
Niels Bohr of International Organization for the Development of Freedom of Education stressed that human rights were indivisible and interdependent and urged the international community to take them seriously.
War Resisters International, the International Indian Treaty Council, the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, the World Peace Council, the Transnational Radical Party, the Indigenous World Association and International Educational
Development, all non-governmental organizations, also commented on the issue of economic, social and cultural rights.
At the end of the session, Iran and Nigeria replied to statements made in the morning by a Norwegian and by a Canadian official, respectively.
Statements in Debate
HAROLD SANDOVAL BERNAL (Colombia) said the international community was far from agreeing a practical and efficient strategy that could lead to a favourable climate for the right to development to become a reality. No civilization, prosperous as it might be, would have a guarantee of survival if its periphery was ruled by hunger, malnutrition, illiteracy and discrimination. The participation of all human beings and all peoples in economic, social, cultural and political development was the necessary condition to ensure world peace. If the distance between the centre and the periphery grew, the threat of war would always be present. Colombia sought to encourage dialogue between industrialised nations and developing countries to clear the way to eliminate obstacles to the full realization of the right to development. Responsibility was thus common to both groups of countries.
TAE-YUL CHO (Republic of Korea) said his delegation had so far failed to detect the expected level of commitment towards the effective implementation of economic, social and cultural rights. Discussions had been filled with political rhetoric and a lack of practicality and specificity. Economic, social and cultural rights were as important as civil and political rights; the promotion of one category of rights at the expense of another would be very costly in the long run. Both categories of rights should supplement rather than supplant each other. Koreans had learned through their own experience that economic and social development was a crucial element, if not a precondition, for the promotion and protection of human rights and democracy. Self-initiated programmes and action at the national level should precede any other efforts at the regional, multilateral or global levels to promote economic, social and cultural rights. Without the firm commitment of governments and the willingness of populations, any aid, international financial or other, would amount to pouring water down the drain. Korea would continue to reach out to any countries in need with a view to sharing its development experience.
ARTURO HERNANDEZ BASAVE (Mexico) said 52 years had elapsed since the United Nations Charter enshrined the right of peoples to development as a fundamental right. Yet, the international community had not attained that noble objective. Increasing poverty in different parts of the world compromised the achievement of that goal. One fifth of mankind lived in dire poverty, while 20 per cent of the world's rich controlled 83 per cent of the earth's resources. The time had come to give concrete expression to the right
- 3 - Press Release HR/CN/773 21 March 1997
to development through the adoption of international mechanisms. In that context, the re-affirmation of the right development as an inalienable right, as stated in Vienna during the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights, would be a major step in the right direction.
HERNAN PLORUTTI (Argentina) said the promotion of social justice was essential, along with political democracy, to ensure human rights. Argentina was putting that to practice, pushing ahead for economic integration with its neighbours to promote trade and development. The common market of the southern part of the American continent was a vehicle which would enable those countries to strengthen ties with the world. Evidence of this was the agreement between the South American group and the European Union. Economic growth could only materialize with the improvement of the quality of life and the strengthening of human rights. Information was a central issue in that regard; Argentina had taken many steps in that field. Argentina also promoted the right to bilingual education for the indigenous peoples living within its borders. Economic growth could enhance the greatness of a nation, but it could not run counter to the happiness of its peoples. By fostering human rights, all countries could resolve their problems.
MOUNIR ZAHRAN (Egypt) said that in the ten years since its adoption, and despite constant pressures from the international community, the Declaration on the Right to Development had not, in any way, been implemented. Today, 89 countries found themselves in a worse situation than they did before, in particular in relation to their level of income. The implementation of the right to development was a duty for all the international community and should be based on a cooperative basis guaranteeing mutual respect. Yet, the globalization of the world economy had placed the realization of that right ever further from the reach of developing countries, who suffered from, among other things, the instability of commodity prices. There had also been a growing trend of developed countries imposing their criteria on developing countries; that aimed at cancelling out the comparative advantage enjoyed by the latter thanks to their lower wage base. Developed countries should also ensure that they honoured their promise to earmark 0.7 per cent of gross domestic product to overseas development aid.
BOZORGMEHR ZIARAN (Iran) said there had been little progress in the implementation of the Declaration on the Right to Development, adopted in 1986. A reason for this was that the right to development had often been treated as a second class right, receiving little attention and support. It needed to be treated as an integral part of all human rights. The right to development was a right of peoples as much as of individuals and should be seen in its entirety. It also should not be confined to the national level, for it also covered relations among States. Iran questioned the wisdom of suggestions by the intergovernmental working of experts on the right to development to redefine that right. The mandate of the working group was to
- 4 - Press Release HR/CN/773 21 March 1997
elaborating a strategy containing concrete and practical measures for the implementation and promotion of the right to development, and nothing more. Although the realization of the right to development was the responsibility of all actors involved in development, there had been no satisfactory contribution to and participation in the deliberations of the working group by international organizations which had not incorporated that right into their programmes. Iran encouraged those organizations to take a more active role. The participation of non-governmental organizations would also significantly contribute to the working group.
RAFAEL CARRILLO-ZURCHER (Costa Rica) said in the ten years since the Declaration on the Right to Development, the international community had come to consider this right as fundamental. His country had long devoted a substantial part of its budget to improving the provision of health facilities and social services, a fact reflected in the high indices registered in those two areas as compared to other countries. Meanwhile, the gap between rich and poor countries continued to grow apace. Developing countries lagged behind developed countries in access to new technologies. Costa Rica had responded to the challenges posed by globalization by formulating a development model which had resulted in the considerable diversification of the economy.
NIELS BOHR, of the International Organization for the Development of Freedom of Education, said the Chairman of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights had decried the unequal treatment those rights were given in the United Nations system. It was not surprising that they continued to be underdeveloped: no experts studied them and planned seminars never took place. Human rights could only be indivisible and interdependent. It was urgent for the international community to take those rights seriously and appoint experts to study them.
NEIL A. F. POPOVIC, of the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, said the linkage between human rights and the environment became clearer all the time -- in factual and in legal terms. In factual terms, the world continued to witness environmental destruction all over the globe. People continued to suffer the consequences through unclean air and water; exposure to dangerous chemicals; lack of access to environmental information; and exclusion from participation in environmental decision-making. In legal terms, courts, constitutions and legislative enactments increasingly recognized that established human rights principles have broad application to the human suffering that accompanied environmental problems. As no existing environmental body was designed or equipped to develop human rights standards, the Commission should incorporate environmental factors into its work, and thereby ensure that human rights concerns arising from environmental destruction were no longer dismissed as peripheral, but rather considered as core human rights.
- 5 - Press Release HR/CN/773 21 March 1997
SAEED MOKBIL, of War Resisters International, said the realization of economic, social and cultural rights could not be achieved in countries, like Yemen, which faced instability. The 1994 war had left an aftermath of destruction. Due to the absence of peace, the door was open for human rights violations. The Commission should urge the Government of Yemen to implement all United Nations resolutions on the crisis and those related to it. The only solution for the crisis was the start of a national dialogue. The end of the conflict would mean an end to human rights violations and the opening of the door to real economic, social and cultural rights.
KAREN TALBOT, of the World Peace Council, said she welcomed the inclusion of the right to development as a basic human right and joined with those who called for people-centred development. During the times of colonization, the international economic order was grossly unfair to the peoples of the nations of the South. Today, transnational corporations were gaining strength and sought to extend their reach in search of maximum profit, following in the wake of imperial and colonial policies. That globalization was being driven by carefully planned, legal and institutional changes embodied in a series of international accords like the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. The negative aspects of globalization were accelerating, spurred by the pervasive legacy of colonialism in the form of crushing foreign debt, vastly unfair terms of trade and protectionist policies of the most powerful industrial nations. The exploitation of cheap labour, capital flight and brain drain were also problems facing countries of the South.
VERONIQUE DE WEICHS DE WENNE, of the Transnational Radical Party, said indigenous peoples were, by any social and economic indicators, the single most disadvantaged group in society. They suffered the highest levels of unemployment; were relegated to the worst paid and most menial jobs; occupied the worst housing; and enjoyed the poorest health conditions. Even in developed countries, these groups had dramatically lower life expectancy and higher rates of disability, alcoholism, drug abuse, criminality and suicide. The loss of traditional lands and natural resources had been identified as a major cause of the deterioration of the health and economic well-being of indigenous peoples. Transnational corporations had created tensions among the peoples of Bougainville, Ogoni and West Papua, and had often played a major role in sustaining repressive regimes, notably in Indonesia, Nigeria and Papua New Guinea.
LAZARO PARY, of the Indigenous World Association, said the phenomenon of indebtedness began in 1492. According to the World Bank, the third world debt exceeded $1.45 billion, having doubled between 1981 and 1991. Every year, developing countries paid more than $50 billion in interest and debt-servicing fees. In Latin America, the situation had become dramatic. The level of debt had risen by 5.5 per cent in 1994, reaching a level of $437 billion. Between them, the four most indebted countries in the region -- Brazil, Mexico,
- 6 - Press Release HR/CN/773 21 March 1997
Venezuela and Argentina -- accounted for 81 per cent of the debt owed by developing countries to American banks. Without adequate measures to ensure a better balance in North-South relations, the external debt of those countries would rise to $660 billion, thereby condemning the majority of the population of those countries to poverty and hunger. The reimbursement of the external debt of those countries was morally wrong and historically and materially unrealizable.
MICHAEL CHAMBERLAIN, of International Educational Development, said Mexico had been living in constant economic crisis for the past decade. The Government was continuously seeking new loans, the latest of which meant that Mexico had to provide the United States with two thirds of its petroleum earnings for the next ten years. Mexico had not solved the problem of increasing poverty, instead restricting spending on healthcare and housing. The economic policies of the Government had led to the bankruptcy of small- and medium-sized businesses, and to a drop in wages. Meanwhile, the Government's agriculture policy had caused a decrease in employment in that sector. Pollution, acid rain and water contamination had also gravely affected agricultural production; toxic wastes had exacerbated human rights violations. The quality of life for Mexicans had deteriorated due to the violation of economic, social and cultural rights. But instead of modifying its economic policies, the Government was undermining the rights of Mexicans, and using force to control the population in certain regions. The Commission should send experts to Mexico to study the situation.
ANTONIO GONZALES, of the Indian Treaty Council, said the right to development of indigenous peoples could not be considered independently from the right to traditional lands and territories, or from the right to self-determination and to a means of subsistence. The destruction of traditional indigenous lands and territories -- indeed, the destruction of whole ecologies -- by rapacious transnational corporations serving no interests but their own greed was well known to the Commission. The ruination of Ogoni lands and the complete disregard of Ogoni human rights and fundamental freedoms by Shell Oil Company, with the complicity of the Nigerian State, was indicative of the breach of the rights of indigenous peoples in other parts of the world. Such was the case in the Nahua and Kugapakori reserve in the Amazon basin; and in the Mole Lake Sokaogon Band of Lake Superior Chippewa within the state of Wisconsin, in the United States. Indigenous traditional lands and territories were now treated by the successor States as free sources of natural reserves and raw materials, without regard for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples.
Right of Reply
FARHAD MAMDOUHI (Iran) said it was exerting its right of reply in response to the statement by the Norwegian State Minister this morning. The
- 7 - Press Release HR/CN/773 21 March 1997
Commission had a busy schedule and speakers were allowed time to raise important issues, not pursue a political agenda. Norway had ignored that. If any speaker wanted to address a specific case, it should be under the item on human rights situations all over the world. The Commission should make sure that did not occur again.
CYRIL GWAM (Nigeria) said it was responding to the statement by the Canadian Minister of State for Latin America and Africa this morning. Dialogue between nations prospered in transparency and respect for sovereign equality of States. Nigeria did not accept responsibility for Canada's "disappointing results" in its efforts at a dialogue with Nigeria. In fact, Nigeria had held fruitful dialogues with many countries. The country regretted Canada had not felt able to join the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group which had visited Nigeria last November. Suffice it to say that Nigeria continued to make satisfactory progress in the implementation of its programme for transition to democratic governance.
The Chairman of the Commission, MIROSLAV SOMOL (Czech Republic) said guest speakers participated in the general debate of the Commission and were authorized to speak on the whole range of items on the agenda.
* *** *