COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS DISCUSSES EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION STANDARDS

Press Release
HR/CN/828

COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS DISCUSSES EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION STANDARDS

(Reissued as received.)

GENEVA, 24 March (UN Information Service) -- Representatives of a number of governments and non-governmental organizations this morning called for the abolition of the death penalty, as the Commission on Human Rights continued its discussion of the status of the international covenants on human rights and the effective functioning of bodies established pursuant to United Nations human rights instruments.

The Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which aims at the abolition of the death penalty, was among the subjects discussed.

According to the Observer for Switzerland, one of 31 States parties to the Second Optional Protocol, it has never been proved that the death penalty reduced crime rates, and its irreversible nature meant that innocent people risked execution and in fact were executed. But the representative of Singapore said the death penalty had often been characterized as a human rights issue in the context of the right of the convicted prisoner to life. The "right to life", however, had to be balanced with the "security of persons" of the victims of the most serious crimes, he added.

This morning the Commission also heard from a guest speaker, Pierre-Henri Imbert, Director of Human Rights at the Council of Europe, who said there was always room for progress in the field, and Europe had its share of problems. He said that social exclusion and inequality were a major challenge; dangerous trends, such as racism and other forms of intolerance were on the increase; more subtle but no less dangerous were defence mechanisms at work in some countries against "foreigners"; and the European Court of Human Rights had found several cases of inhuman or degrading treatment and torture. The Council of Europe was responding to these problems by, among other things, strengthening international protection mechanisms and developing new structures and methods for closer monitoring, especially for prevention, he added.

At the close of the meeting, Chairman Jacob Selebi (South Africa) announced that following a meeting this morning, the Commission's Bureau was proposing that the Commission consider holding a separate debate on gender and the human rights of women on Monday, 6 April. The holding of the debate is supported by the United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women and the High Commissioner for Human Rights, he said.

Statements were also made by representative of Uruguay, Cuba, India, Poland, China, Austria, Argentina, Russian Federation, Brazil, Republic of Korea, Australia, Iran, Romania, Armenia and Swaziland. The representative of Chile spoke on the right to development. The following non-governmental organizations also participated in the debate: Human Rights Advocates, Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation, World Jewish Congress, European Union of Public Relations, World Muslim Congress and African Commission of Health and Human Rights.

Statement by Council of Europe's Human Rights Director

PIERRE-HENRI IMBERT, Director of Human Rights at the Council of Europe, said human rights formed the very foundation of the Council, which currently comprised 40 States. Member States agreed to subject themselves to a supranational and judicial system of protection of human rights. The European system was a direct result of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Council would celebrate the anniversary of the Universal Declaration with a series of activities over the course of the year. There was always room for progress in the field, and Europe had its share of problems. Social exclusion and inequality were a major challenge and dangerous trends such as racism and other forms of intolerance were on the increase. More subtle but no less dangerous were defence mechanisms at work in some countries against "foreigners". The European Court of Human Rights had found several cases of inhuman or degrading treatment and torture. The Council was responding to these problems by strengthening international protection mechanisms; developing new structures and methods for closer monitoring, especially for prevention; improving national situations by making international action more operational; and setting standards.

Statements in Debate

CARLOS PEREZ DEL CASTILLO (Uruguay) said his country attached great importance to the abolition of capital punishment. In its 1830 Constitution, Uruguay already had addressed the right to life and its protection before definitively abolishing the death penalty in 1907. The application of penal and military death sentences were thus abolished by the Constitution of the same year. The 1918 Constitution had also maintained the same principle with regard to death penalty. At this fiftieth anniversary year of the Universal

- 3 - Press Release HR/CN/828 24 March 1998

Declaration, Uruguay affirmed its association with all countries that advocated the abolition of the death penalty; it would also co-sponsor a text on the subject.

RODOLFO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said his country attached particular importance to the work of the treaty bodies. However, the effectiveness and credibility of the treaty bodies system depended on the way those mechanisms coped with the challenges looming ahead. Constructive and straightforward dialogue between State parties to the different human rights instruments was the only way to ensure an adequate environment for the full implementation of those instruments. Cuba stressed that treaty bodies had not been conceived as international courts of law. They should strictly respect the mandates they had been given, and there should be common guidelines ruling the election of their members to ensure an equitable geographical representation. Moreover, the tendency to impose a single working language in the informal sessions of treaty bodies, and the attempts to validate information submitted in only one language, was inadmissible. There should also be clear patterns of admissibility for the information supplied by sources other than the States parties.

M.C. BHANDARE (India) said that despite its past successes, the treaty bodies system was undergoing a period of crisis due to a rapid increase in the number of countries ratifying the treaties. The system was strained and cumbersome, and two recent instances of countries seeking to withdraw from commitments undertaken did not augur well. Furthermore, elections to treaty bodies were increasingly running contrary to principles of geographical equity. Reform must be undertaken with sensitivity and sophistication; first priority must be given to achieving universal ratification of the six core treaties, and to well-designed projects for advisory services and technical cooperation. There was a further need to address the problem of overdue reports, to carefully evaluate the effectiveness of "special reports" and "urgent procedures"; the value they added seemed to be low. And it was important to provide sufficient resources for the treaty bodies.

JERZY CIECHANSKI (Poland) said the it was somewhat puzzling that the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, being three years behind in reviewing Poland's periodic report, was considering the adoption of a new optional protocol for the consideration of communications concerning non-compliance with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights. If adopted, the protocol would add new procedural obligations to that already overloaded Committee. Poland did not oppose the optional protocol in principle, but the conditions under which it would consider the protocol's possible adoption were quite stringent. The Committee first had to eliminate the current backlog of reports pending before it; that practically could not be done without serious reform of the reporting procedures. In the same manner, the Committee had to precisely define the conditions of fulfilment of the obligations under the Covenant. Meanwhile, it

- 4 - Press Release HR/CN/828 24 March 1998

was hard to imagine that a democratic government with strong civil society might try to deliberately and systematically evade, let alone violate provisions of the relevant treaties. Therefore, after filing detailed initial reports, States should be asked to respond to treaty bodies as to the implementation of particular provisions of the treaties rather than to submit repetitive comprehensive periodic reports on implementation of treaties which they dutifully follow.

WANG MIN (China) said it could not be denied that the monitoring mechanisms of the human rights conventions faced a number of problems, including multiple reporting, overdue reports and delays in considering reports. China suggested, among other things, that States parties had the obligation to face these problems and make positive suggestions to resolve them. Coordination between different treaty bodies -- and between those bodies and other United Nations organs -- must be strengthened to avoid duplication and reduce the burden on States parties. Also, while reviewing implementation reports, the treaty bodies should take into full account the levels of economic development and the religious and cultural backgrounds of the countries concerned, especially those of the developing countries. The bodies must act in strict accordance with their mandates; adhere to the principle of impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity; and establish a relationship based on equality and mutual respect with States parties.

He added that his Government had resumed its exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong on 1 July 1997 and had already made arrangements for providing information to the respective treaty bodies on Hong Kong's implementation of the relevant human rights conventions.

CHRISTIAN STROHAL (Austria) said a healthy treaty bodies system required the setting up of technical and advisory services programmes to establish effective national human rights protection systems. Additional ratifications were always welcomed, even if they were unequally distributed -- fewer accessions to the Convention against Torture, for example, which deserved more -- and even if there was a rising number of reservations which tended to limit the very purposes for which the Conventions were developed. Countries must struggle to deliver their reports to treaty bodies on time, and he admitted that Austria had had problems with this. Other measures should be taken to reduce the backlog of reports and work afflicting the treaty bodies. Among suitable reforms would be consolidation and streamlining of reporting obligations -- especially, following a thorough and comprehensive first report, much more specifically targeted follow-up reports focusing on issues precisely raised by the treaty bodies. Use of special procedures, emergency procedures, and State visits should be reconsidered.

- 5 - Press Release HR/CN/828 24 March 1998

HERNAN FLORUTTI (Argentina) said the international community should intensify its efforts to encourage those States that had not already done so to adhere to the various human rights instruments. Argentina had ratified the different international human rights instruments and given 11 of them -- universal and regional -- Constitutional rank. In compliance with its obligations under the numerous human rights instruments, Argentina had submitted in time reports to the respective monitoring bodies. A State that regularly submitted periodic reports opened itself to scrutiny willingly, something that by its very nature strengthened the principle according to which human rights were not exclusively internal affairs. Complying with reporting obligations also implied a commitment to respect and follow recommendations issuing from the different monitoring bodies.

ALEXANDER PETRACHKOV (Russian Federation) said the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provided an excellent reason to analyze problems of States complying with human rights treaties. Human rights became less universal the more human requirements were incorporated into them. As the United Nations created modern instruments and mechanisms, it should not mimic the builders of the Tower of Babel who, after losing their common language, had been unable to finish the structure. A scrupulous analysis of the work of the treaty bodies was needed. The Russian Federation believed that the report of independent expert Philip Alston (document E/CN.4/1997/74) was a good basis for reforms.

He said his country joined the universal movement to abolish the death penalty. It was taking steps to phase out the death penalty, and no executions had been carried out since August 1996.

CARLOS ALBERTO SINAS MAGALHAES (Brazil) said that although a large gap remained between the norms of international law and the reality prevailing in many societies, ratification of human-rights instruments were an essential step in broader promotion and protection; universal ratification should be sought, and reservations discouraged. Brazil made every effort to meet its treaty obligations and recently had submitted several reports to the relevant bodies. It did not favour the proposal to reduce the materials and relevant documents available in all official languages; that would hinder the education and effectiveness of national human rights officials. To save time and resources, it favoured, however, the proposal to consolidate State information in just one or two periodic reports to be examined accordingly by each of the various treaty bodies. It also was a good idea to tailor individual reports to matters of concern and to avoid covering a vast array of issues of little importance to the country concerned. Brazil supported the Italian proposal on abolition of the death penalty.

- 6 - Press Release HR/CN/828 24 March 1998

KIM JOONG KEUN (Republic of Korea) said universal ratification of the international human rights covenants was essential to promote and protect human rights. Implementation by States parties of their treaty obligations was equally important. That could be facilitated with the adoption of policies and laws to meet international standards, and by fulfilling reporting obligations under various human rights covenants. Yet, the international community had faced increasing delays, not only in States parties' submission of reports but also in their review by the relevant committees. In response to that problem, further initiatives should be explored to reduce inefficiency where United Nations human rights mechanisms were concerned, both in organization and procedure, with a view to more effective implementation of international human rights instruments.

CRISPIN CONROY (Australia), speaking also on behalf of Canada and New Zealand, said this year was an occasion to reaffirm the consensus from the Vienna World Conference that human rights were universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated. On this occasion a concerted effort by those States which had not done so to ratify the core human rights treaties would be a significant measure to reaffirm this important principle.

The treaty bodies had become an indispensable and integral part of the United Nations human rights programme, and their influence had extended beyond their treaty supervisory functions, he said. The treaty body system was currently encountering serious difficulties which had to be resolved. For example, reporting obligations placed burdens not only on States parties but also upon the treaty bodies which all faced a large backlog of reports to consider. Professor Philip Alston had recommended the reduction of the reporting burden by making periodic reports shorter, more analytical and focused on a limited range of issues. He also recommended that reports be based on dialogue with and more targeted questioning by the relevant treaty body. Australia, Canada and New Zealand were giving active consideration to following up these recommendations. The treaty bodies could accomplish more with the resources they had. At the same time, additional resources were essential if the system was to function effectively.

JEAN-DANIEL VIGNY, Observer for Switzerland, said the country had ratified the relevant protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights abolishing the death penalty in 1987. Subsequently the punishment had been abolished for all crimes and circumstances, and the country had ratified the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The trend towards the worldwide abolition of capital punishment was continuing; now a positive majority of 102 countries either completely prohibited it, prohibited it in most circumstances, or had not carried it out in years. More converts could be expected. But other developments darkened the picture -- four de facto abolitionist countries had resumed executions recently, and the legislation of six countries, including the United States, still made it possible to use the death penalty against minors. It apparently

- 7 - Press Release HR/CN/828 24 March 1998

had never been proved that the death penalty reduced crime rates, and its irreversible nature meant that innocent people risked execution and in fact were executed.

SEE CHAK MUN (Singapore) said the death penalty had often been characterized as a human rights issue in the context of the right of the convinced prisoner to life. However, the "right to life" had to be balanced with the "security of persons" of the victims of the most serious crimes. The emphasis on the right to life alone showed the selective approach some took with regard to the application of the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration. In single-mindedly insisting on an absolute abolitionist view, the "right to life" and the "security of persons" of victims of serious crimes had somehow been totally ignored or downplayed. Singapore felt strongly that the right to life of those convicted of the most serious crimes should be weighed against the rights of the victims and the right of the larger community to live in peace and security. Moreover, Singapore's experience had shown that the retention of the death penalty had preserved and safeguarded the interests of the society as a whole in the maintenance of law and order, an important precondition for the preservation of human dignity and the enjoyment of other human rights.

PAVEL GRECU (Romania) said his country endorsed the view of the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the essential role of the universal human rights instruments and their treaty bodies in strengthening human rights and for preventive action. As a party to almost all human rights instruments, Romania believed that universal ratification of those treaties should be the primary priority for all States. The growing number of States parties to international instruments protecting human rights was reason for great satisfaction. This was a direct result of actions taken at the international level to gather States around human rights values. However, such actions should always be accompanied by the implementation of specific measures to build national institutions and legislation to promote human rights.

KAREN NAZARIAN (Armenia) said Armenia had become a State party to a large number of human rights instruments, and intended to implement their principles. Some countries laid more emphasis on civil and political rights, but for Armenia, economic, social, and cultural rights were just as important. The country took seriously the provisions of all human rights instruments, and reported as required. Armenia also wished to stress the importance of the Convention against genocide; protection from genocide was at the very heart of human rights, and considering developments over the last 50 years, one could not be complacent about the subject. Armenia intended to table a resolution on the fiftieth anniversary of that Convention at the current session of the Commission. It was important to reaffirm international commitment to preventing this heinous crime.

- 8 - Press Release HR/CN/828 24 March 1998

MOSES M. DLAMINI (Swaziland) said the death penalty had been inherited from those countries which now advocated its abolition. Swaziland had so far maintained capital punishment in its Constitution and had no intention to drop it. It was a useful arm to hinder those who attempted against the lives of others. The provision for the death penalty had also protected innocents by discouraging criminals from acting within their desires to take away the lives of others. Nevertheless, the provision had not been executed for the last 20 years in Swaziland.

JENNIFER BROWN, of Human Rights Advocates, said her group urged all countries to abolish death penalty eligibility for minors in practice and on their books. Since 1990, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the United States, Nigeria and Yemen had executed juvenile offenders. In 1994, Yemen had instituted a new Model Penal Code which raised the minimum age for the death penalty to 18; Yemen should be commended for this. The United States was the worst violator, executing nine juvenile offenders since 1985. The violations committed by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Pakistan and the United States required that extreme measures be taken by the international community. Human Rights Advocates recommended, among other things, that the Commission urge the five countries mentioned to submit progress reports to the Commission every year starting in 1999 to detail progress made.

RIYAZ PUNJABI, of the Himalayan Research and Cultural Foundation, said that more States should ratify the relevant human rights instruments and optional protocols in order to enhance the promotion and protection of human rights in general. However, some States, despite their accession to various conventions and protocols, had continued to violate the human rights of their peoples. In Asia, many governments had been engaged in systematic violations of the human rights of minorities and other vulnerable segments of their populations. Pakistan, for one, had continued to violate the rights of religious and ethnic minorities.

MICHAEL COLSON, of UN Watch/World Jewish Congress, said one must confront the accountability of treaty body members for their views and behaviour. On 3 March 1998, the Swiss Government reported to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination about the successful prosecutions of individuals selling Roger Garaudy's book, "The Founding Myths of Israeli Policy". Garaudy was a notorious Holocaust denier whose hate-filled work had been convicted in the courts of both Switzerland and France. The Committee Chairman, addressing the Committee in his supposed "personal capacity", said he was deeply astonished that Switzerland had prosecuted Garaudy's bookseller. He could not believe that a member of the Committee, let alone its Chairman, would make positive comments about the convicted Garaudy. He said the Chairman of UN Watch met with the Committee Chairman to seek clarification about this event. During the meeting, the Committee Chairman reiterated his respect for the "gentleman" Garaudy and spoke of the author's popularity. Upon hearing an expression of concern with the racial incitement and hatred

- 9 - Press Release HR/CN/828 24 March 1998

central to Garaudy's writing, the Committee Chairman said, "You only say these things because you are a Jew". Following this, the Chairman issued an untruthful statement. This tissue of lies was a shameful attempt to cover the Chairman's tracks for his irresponsible conduct.

A.S. NARANG, of the European Union of Public Relations, said the Lashkar e Taiba was the armed wing of the Markaz ul Dawaa ul Arshad, an institution functioning in Pakistan with the full knowledge of the Government. The Markaz taught that the Lashkar were the only ones worthy of living, and others who did not hew to their religious beliefs were so much vermin to be exterminated. The armed band put on a massive display of its ideology at an international congregation organized in Pakistan with the full knowledge of the Government at which the leader of the movement declared that jihad was holy duty and that the Koran had declared Hindus and Jews enemies of Islam. In Jammu and Kashmir, incidentally a Muslim majority state, the armed wing had particularly carried out its holy war, and one result was evident on 25 January when 23 Kashmiri Hindus were massacred by its men. He was sure the Kashmiri Hindus were wondering what had happened to the effective functioning of bodies established pursuant to United Nations human rights instruments.

SYED SHAUKAT HUSSAIN NAQVI, of the World Muslim Congress, said while India had ratified both human rights Covenants, it had yet to give effect to many of the provisions listed in them. In ratifying the Covenants, India had taken back with one hand what it had given with the other. He was referring to the declarations and reservations made by India regarding various articles of the two instruments. India had entered a reservation on the article of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which dealt with self-determination, arguing that it applied only to those territories under foreign domination. Kashmiris were under foreign domination; they were not part of India. And they never had a chance to decide which country they wanted to be a part of.

SAIDOU KANE, of the African Commission of Health and Human Rights Promoters, said that 137 States had ratified the International Covenant on Economic and Social Rights, while 140 had ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. However, most States had trouble respecting and applying those Covenants. For example, out of 30 African countries which applied capital punishment, only eight had abolished it. Contemporary forms of slavery and violations of the rights of women and children also continued in countries which had signed the Covenants. In order to spread human rights and the right to development, the United Nations should better supervise the implementation of those rights in the States parties to the Covenants.

ALEJANDRO SALINAS (Chile) said the full application of economic, social, and cultural rights was still being delayed, regretfully, with respect to people not only in developing countries but even among many people in the developed countries; the Commission must make a special appeal for

- 10 - Press Release HR/CN/828 24 March 1998

further progress in achieving the right to development. Chile considered the right to development imperative, both nationally and internationally; it supported all initiatives to improve the situation. It was sometimes forgotten that social progress was one of the fundamental concerns of those who framed the Universal Declaration on Human Rights 50 years ago. A mechanism must be established for monitoring and following up progress in the right to development; duplication should be avoided. Chile was striving to balance economic and development rights and civil and political rights as it continued its building of democracy. Development, as Chile understood it, was the result of application of rights and of a full supply of sufficient material resources.

* *** *

Note: In Press Release HR/CN/818, of 18 March 1998, the sixth complete paragraph on page 5 should read as follows:

"BILJANA STEFANOVSKA-SEKOVSKA (The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) said the constitutional name of her country was the Republic of Macedonia. Could the Commission in this anniversary year understand attempts to deny the people of a country the right to name they used?"