PRESS CONFERENCE BY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE EXPERTS

Press Briefing

PRESS CONFERENCE BY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE EXPERTS

Members of the Human Rights Committee briefed correspondents at Headquarters this afternoon on the outcome of the Committee's sixty-second session, which started on 23 March and is scheduled to conclude on 9 April. Representing the Committee at the briefing were its Chairman, Christine Chanet, expert from France, and two Vice-Chairmen, Prafullachandra Bhagwati, expert from India, and Elizabeth Evatt, expert from Australia.

Ms. Chanet said the Committee had been considering reports submitted by States parties on their compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Committee had before it the third periodic report of Cyprus, the initial report of Zimbabwe, and the fourth periodic reports of Uruguay and Finland. A report of Ecuador was due to be considered, but the representatives from that country were unable to come to New York. The Committee would take it up at a later date in Geneva. The Committee had also reviewed private communications received from individuals who claimed to be victims of violations of their rights under the Covenant. It was also drafting a general comment on article 12 of the Covenant, which concerned freedom of movement.

Mr. Bhagwati said there was a large number of communications before the Committee. A working group of the Committee examined the communications and made preliminary remarks, which were later submitted to the Committee in a plenary session. The Committee's working group also appointed rapporteurs from amongst its members to look at the country reports. He said he had been assigned to be the special rapporteur for Zimbabwe.

The Committee found that Zimbabwe had made some progress in human rights, he continued. Until recently, a widow did not have the right of inheritance and was totally deprived of her husband's estate upon his death. In November 1997, legislation had been passed that entitled the woman to inherit one third of her husband's estate. The Government of Zimbabwe had established the office of Ombudsman, which was another positive step forward. Yet, there were also a large number of concerns regarding the implementation of human rights in Zimbabwe. In its concluding remarks, the Committee expressed concern about cultural practices that were still prevalent in Zimbabwe and were incompatible with the provisions of the Covenant. Steps should be taken to eliminate those cultural practices which were effecting particularly the rights of women.

Ms. Evatt said most States parties that submitted reports to the Committee still had some remaining areas of gender discrimination. In Finland, that was expressed in terms of the wage differential and the absence of women in high positions. In Zimbabwe, there were customary laws and practices that seriously disadvantaged women in many respects. Both Cyprus

and Zimbabwe still continued to discriminate against homosexual conduct, which was an issue that the Committee took up with each of those countries.

There were also contrasts among the four countries, she continued. In Finland, the Committee was very much concerned about the condition of the indigenous Sami population. The Government of Uruguay told the Committee that the country's indigenous people had completely disappeared. Another main concern in Uruguay was the Government's failure to investigate some human rights violations that occurred under a previous military regime. The Committee was very concerned about the relatives of those affected, and there should be proper investigations and a full disclosure about the situation.

Ms. Chanet said the Committee asked about discrimination against Turkish Cypriots in Cyprus, but the Government had denied that such discrimination existed. In Uruguay, the Committee reiterated its deep concern about the Ley de Caducidad de la Pretención del Estado (Expiry Law of the Punitive Powers of the State). The Government had stated that it had chosen peace over justice. But the Committee stressed that by choosing peace over justice, the Government could end up with neither.

A correspondent asked if the Committee evaluated the treatment of labour unions of opposition parties in Zimbabwe. Mr. Bhagwati said that topic was not discussed too extensively. The Committee questioned the delegation about freedom of assembly and freedom of association. Certain answers were not satisfactory, and the Committee had expressed its concern. Most of the questions addressed the excessive use of force by the police during food riots earlier in the year, when a number of people were injured and killed.

Asked if there was a way for the Committee to obtain information about the human rights situation in northern Cyprus, Ms. Chanet said Turkey was not a State party to the Covenant, so there was no way for the Committee to know.

Did the Committee believe the Government of Uruguay's assertion that there were no minority groups in the country? a correspondent asked. Ms. Evatt said there were minority groups in Uruguay. The Government had said that the indigenous population had been completely wiped out.

Ms. Chanet said Uruguay did not understand the concept of a minority group, as stated in article 27 of the Covenant, and had used the wrong interpretation of that definition. That was not only true of Uruguay; many countries had that problem. Those States denied the existence of minority groups, so it could declare that there was no discrimination in the country.

Asked to give a brief explanation of the Covenant, Ms. Evatt said there were many rights protected by the Covenant. The Covenant addressed: the right to life, the right not to be tortured, political rights, freedom of expression, equality of the sexes, protection of minorities, right to privacy, fair trial provisions, and freedom of movement.

Human Rights Press Conference - 3 - 6 April 1998

The Covenant was a treaty, and the States that ratified it had to apply the treaty, Ms. Chanet said. They had to fulfil all the provisions of the Covenant.

The States parties to the Covenant were required to submit reports to the Committee, Mr. Bhagwati said. The Committee examined those reports to determine whether the human rights embodied in the Covenant were being properly implemented, in law and practice. Non-governmental organizations also briefed the Committee about the human rights situations prevailing in the countries. The Committee questioned the delegations that presented the country reports and made its concluding observations.

What cultural practices in Zimbabwe were not compatible with the provisions of the Covenant? a correspondent asked. Mr. Bhagwati said those practices included ngozi, or girl child pledging; lobola, or the bride price; and genital mutilation. The delegation denied the practice of genital mutilation existed in the country, but that was contradicted by information the Committee had received from non-governmental organizations.

* *** *