HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS DECLARATION APPROVED BY COMMISSION AFTER 13 YEARS OF DRAFTING
Press Release
HR/CN/846
"HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS" DECLARATION APPROVED BY COMMISSION AFTER 13 YEARS OF DRAFTING
19980408 Commission Adopts Resolutions Regarding Death Penalty; Convention against Genocide, International Covenants and Treaty Bodies(Reissued as received.)
GENEVA, 3 April (UN Information Service) -- The Commission on Human Rights unanimously approved this afternoon a draft declaration designed to protect individuals and groups involved in human rights work -- often known as "human rights defenders" -- and recommended its adoption by the Economic and Social Council and General Assembly. Approval of the document followed 13 years of negotiations carried out by a Commission working group.
The draft, consisting of a preamble and 20 articles, declares, among other things, that everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to promote and to strive for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and international levels; that each State has the prime responsibility and duty to protect, promote, and implement such rights and freedoms; and that the State shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection by the competent authorities of everyone individually and in association with others, against any violence, threats, retaliation, pressure, or other arbitrary action as a consequence of their legitimate actions in defending or promoting human rights.
The Commission also adopted resolutions supporting gradual abolition of the death penalty; urging States to ratify, implement, meet reporting obligations on, and follow the recommendations made on reports related to international human rights covenants; and calling on States to intensify activities to implement the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
The measure on the death penalty was adopted by a roll-call vote of 26 in favour to 13 opposed, with 12 abstentions. Several States spoke before the vote. Some said they considered the punishment applicable in some extreme cases, others said the choice of whether or not to use the death penalty was a matter of sovereign decision-making by States and their citizens.
Speaking before the vote were the representatives of Pakistan, Philippines, United States, Tunisia, Bhutan and Madagascar. Pakistan spoke after the vote.
Also this morning, the Commission concluded its debate on the rights of prisoners and detainees.
Statements were made by the representatives of Pakistan, China, Tunisia, Russian Federation, Cameroon, Algeria, Iran, Cyprus, and Zambia, as well as the Observer for Switzerland.
The Commission also heard statements by the representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), International Federation of Women in Legal Careers, International Council of Nurses, World Muslim Congress, World Federation of Trade Unions, Worldview International Foundation, Transnational Radical Party, Federation of Associations for the Defense and Protection of Human Rights, International League for Human Rights, Society for Threatened Peoples, Commission for the Defense of Human Rights in Central America, and of the working group on arbitrary detention. the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and Lawyers, Param Cumaraswamy, also spoke.
The representatives of Venezuela and Cuba spoke in exercise of the right of reply.
Action on Resolutions
By the resolution on the question of a draft declaration on the right and responsibility of individuals, groups and organs of society to promote and protect universally recognized rights and fundamental freedoms, adopted without a vote, the Commission approved the text of the draft declaration, decided to consider the issue at its fifty-fifth session, and recommended a draft resolution to the Economic and Social Council that would approve the draft declaration and recommend it for adoption by the General Assembly.
MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ (Cuba) said his country fully associated itself with the consensus. It thanked the representative of Norway and others who contributed to the drafting of the text. The wording in operative paragraph 3 of the text was acceptable to Cuba. It meant that next year, at the Commission's fifty-fifth session -- and once the General Assembly had adopted the resolution, as was hoped, at its next regular session -- the Commission could once again see how it could give attention to the issue. The situation relating to individuals, groups and organizations promoting human rights had already been the subject of continued attention for some time under many diverse mechanisms.
- 3 - Press Release HR/CN/846 8 April 1998
In a resolution on the question of the death penalty, adopted in a roll-call vote of 26 in favour to 13 against, with 12 abstaining, the Commission called on all States parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that had not yet done so to consider acceding to or ratifying the Second Optional Protocol, aiming at abolition of the death penalty. It urged all States that still maintained the death penalty to comply fully with their obligations under the Covenant, notably in not imposing the death penalty for any but the most serious crimes, not imposing it for crimes committed by persons below 18 years of age, in excluding pregnant women from capital punishment, and in ensuring the right to seek pardon or commutation of sentence. It called upon such States to progressively restrict the number of offenses for which the penalty could be imposed; to establish moratoriums on executions with a view to completely abolishing the death penalty; and to make available to the public information with regard to the death penalty.
The following countries voted in support of the resolution: Argentina, Austria, Belarus, Brazil, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Congo, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Mexico, Nepal, Peru, Poland, Russian Federation, South Africa, Ukraine and the United Kingdom.
The following countries voted against: Bangladesh, Bhutan, Botswana, China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Pakistan, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Sudan and the United States.
The following countries abstained: Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guinea, India, Madagascar, Morocco, Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Uganda.
Speaking before the vote, AKRAN ZAKI (Pakistan) said the death penalty was imposed in Pakistan only exceptionally for the most serious crimes, and after due judicial procedure with careful review. It was subject to appeal and could be revoked by pardon of the President. If the resolution was put to a vote, Pakistan would be obliged to vote against it.
DENIS LEPATAN (Philippines) said the delegation wished to place on record its reservation on the resolution on the death penalty. The Philippines was unable to support any resolution which banned or called for a moratorium on the death penalty. The Constitution of the Philippines, which reflected the sovereign will of the people, provided for the death penalty for serious crimes. The Philippines reaffirmed its belief that each State should decide whether or not to impose this penalty to safeguard its people from heinous crimes. The Philippines only imposed the death penalty for heinous crimes and in full observance of due process.
- 4 - Press Release HR/CN/846 8 April 1998
GEORGE MOOSE (United States) said his country could not support the resolution. The question of whether capital punishment should be imposed in connection with the most serious crimes was an important one. It was a subject of ongoing debate within his own country, as it had been in many others. In a democratic society, the criminal justice system, including the punishments prescribed for the most serious crimes, should reflect the will of the people freely expressed and appropriately implemented. Within the United States, the issue of capital punishment continued to be freely debated and was the subject of strongly held views. Many countries had abolished the death penalty under their domestic laws, but the United States' open and democratic process had led to different results.
KAMEL MORJANE (Tunisia) said the country's Constitution enshrined the inviolability of life. The death sentence had been abolished in a de facto sense, as it was only imposed in the most very extreme cases, involving only the most heinous crimes. The last execution had been carried out in 1992. If there was a vote, Tunisia would abstain on the resolution.
KINWA SINWIE (Bhutan) said his country was not opposed to the draft resolution on the death penalty. That extreme form of punishment had not been carried out in Bhutan since 1964. However, Bhutan could not support the resolution on grounds that it undermined the right of sovereign States to determine their own laws.
ZAFERA MAXIME (Madagascar) said the penal code included the death penalty for crimes involving aggravated circumstances, or for serious crimes involving the security of State. Although several death sentences had been imposed, they had never been applied.
Speaking after the vote, IFTEKHAR CHOWDHURY (Bangladesh) said his delegation congratulated Italy and other sponsors on the adoption of the resolution on the death penalty. Italy deserved praise for its dedicated efforts over a long period of time to obtain the Commission's recommendation of the elimination of the penalty. Bangladesh regretted that it was not in a position to vote positively on the resolution because it still retained the death penalty in its law books. However, this punishment was rarely carried out, and then only for heinous crimes against women. Bangladesh hoped that the situation might be altered in the future.
By the terms of a resolution on status of the international covenants on human rights, adopted without a vote, the Commission appealed strongly to all States that had not yet done so to become parties to the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and on Civil and Political Rights, as well as to accede to the Optional Protocols to the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and to make the declaration provided for in its article 41. It emphasized the importance of strictest compliance by States with their obligations under these instruments; stressed the importance of
- 5 - Press Release HR/CN/846 8 April 1998
avoiding the erosion of human rights by derogation, and underlined the necessity of strict observance of the agreed conditions and procedures for derogation under article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It encouraged States to limit reservations lodged to the international covenants and to review such reservations regularly; and urged States to fulfil in good time their reporting obligations under the International Covenants and to take duly into account the observations of the relevant treaty bodies on the national reports submitted to them.
In a resolution on the fiftieth anniversary of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted without a vote, the Commission reaffirmed the significance of the Convention; invited States that had not yet ratified or acceded to it to consider doing so; and called upon all States to increase and intensify their activities aimed at full implementation of the Convention's provisions.
Statements on Rights of Detainees, Torture, Enforced Disappearances
AKRAM ZAKI (Pakistan) said the Constitution prohibited torture and had safeguards against arbitrary arrest and detention. Despite difficult legacies and external interference and mischief, the Government was seeking to translate these standards into reality. Difficulties included poverty and underdevelopment, the fallout from the war in Afghanistan, which included 3 million refugees on Pakistan's territory, and interference by another neighbour, which had responded to its failure to suppress the Kashmiri people by sponsoring sabotage and terrorism in Karachi and other cities and areas of Pakistan. Pakistan would determinedly combat terrorism and sectarian strife while observing Constitutional protections and international human rights obligations. The propaganda spread against Pakistan by non-governmental organizations paid and sponsored by India could not be ignored. If those non- governmental organizations were genuinely committed to human rights, why did they ignore the massive human rights violations perpetrated by India, especially in occupied Jammu and Kashmir?
JEAN-DANIEL VIGNY, Observer for Switzerland said that since its creation in 1980, the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances had received 47,758 cases, of which only 2,818 had been clarified. The Group's latest report lists countries in which more than 100 cases of enforced or involuntary disappearances had been reported in the last 25 years. There were nine such countries in Latin America -- Argentina, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua and Peru; seven in Asia -- India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Philippines and Sri Lanka; and four in Africa -- Algeria, Ethiopia, Morocco and Sudan. Turkey and the former Soviet Union were also countries where cases of disappearances had been pointed out. In order to combat the phenomenon of disappearances, the Group should count with the cooperation of States, particularly when it sought to visit countries concerned. Iraq had refused the Group access to its territory, but Colombia,
- 6 - Press Release HR/CN/846 8 April 1998
Turkey, Yemen and Iran seemed willing to allow such visits. Switzerland urged the authorities of those countries to allow the Group to visit them in 1998.
LUCY GWANMESIA (Cameroon) said her Government had already responded to the allegations of torture highlighted in the report of Nigel Rodley, Special Rapporteur on torture. Cameroon wished to reiterate to the Commission its commitment to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. For example, emergency anti-democratic laws had been scrapped in 1990, and the National Commission for Human Rights and Freedoms was doing a marvellous job in the identification and follow-up of complaints of human rights violations. The Government had never authorized its public officials to perpetrate lawlessness. Cameroon recognized that poor prison infrastructure might add to the pain and suffering of detention and imprisonment; the majority of prisons and detention centres in Cameroon were ill-adapted and archaic in terms of space and facilities, and they suffered from overcrowding. The Government had plans to improve the situation, but the building of new prisons entailed huge costs and the country was still on the path to economic recovery.
LAZHAR SOUALEM (Algeria) said all of the thematic mechanisms of the Commission, without exception, had expressed their pleasure at the cooperation of the Algerian Government; Algeria was committed to continuing such cooperation. The smooth operations of such mechanisms depended on objective treatment for all allegations received; such allegations must be verified in order to distinguish those that were well-founded from those that were spurious and motivated by aims other than those of improving human rights. It was highly regrettable the Special Rapporteur on torture had included almost word for word the allegations of a non-governmental organizations whose opposition to Algeria was notorious; that organization had admitted that the allegations came from an opposition political party. The Committee against Torture, by contrast, had said there was no systematic torture committed in the country, and had expressed approval of the Government's efforts to eradicate such offenses. There was no impunity or complacency towards perpetrators of any excesses of that kind, and heavy punishments had been handed down to persons convicted of such excesses.
PASCAL DAUDIN, of the International Committee of the Red Cross, said his Committee had started its activities in favour of persons deprived of their freedoms during international armed conflicts. The Red Cross visited prisoners of war and civilian internees on the basis of the Geneva Conventions, from which it drew its mandate and which prescribed the conditions and procedures of the visits. It had also extended that type of activities to the benefit of detained persons in relation to internal conflicts. By doing so, the Red Cross was also preventing or putting an end to enforced disappearances, torture and other forms of ill-treatments. To the Red Cross, the visits to the places of detention represented an indispensable instrument helped it find out precisely about the situation. In order to fully play its role, the Red Cross had established four non-derrogable
- 7 - Press Release HR/CN/846 8 April 1998
conditions: access to all detainees, interviewing the prisoners of its choice without anyone attending, to confirm the identity and to repeat the visits.
ESHARGH JAHROMI (Iran) said freedom of speech and opinion was a crucial and indispensable requirement. The necessity for the elaboration of the international standards on the right to freedom of expression was justified by the fact that any individual lived in a society and was affected by the views of others. The freedom of expression also enabled the media and individuals to assume a watchdog role and to guard against the abuse of power at all levels. The exercise of freedom of expression also played an educational role which was vital in any society, especially in developing countries. However, these functions could only be fulfilled when the right of freedom of expression was treated in a genuine manner. There had to be full observance of the principle of impartiality and non-selectivity. The international community and the Commission should give equal attention to the reports of the violations of the right of freedom and of expression in all parts of the world. For example, Roger Garaudy, a Muslim writer who had expressed his opinion on a historical event had been charged and convicted for it amid general indifference.
PETROS EFTYCHIOU (Cyprus) said the tragic problem of missing persons in Cyprus had gone unresolved since 1975. At that time the Commission had called "for intensification of efforts aimed at tracing and accounting for missing persons". But the relatives of the missing still did not know what had happened to these people; they lived in a state of uncertainty and agony. After long efforts, the Government of Cyprus reached an agreement on the matter with the Turkish Cypriot leader in July 1997. Following the agreement in January 1998, an initial exchange of information on burial sites took place. Other steps provided for in the agreement were expected to be implemented in a spirit of cooperation and good will. It was hoped that those developments, as well as the forthcoming appointment by the Secretary-General of a representative on the Committee on Missing Persons, as well as other needed personnel would give needed impetus for the desired progress towards the resolution of that tragic humanitarian problem.
P.N. SINYINZA (Zambia) said that following the successful quashing of the 28 October coup attempt, a number of persons -- politicians and soldiers -- had been detained, pending furnishing of charges. However, due to the provisions of legislation concerning arrests and charging which required restricted persons to be charged within 24 hours, and due to the complexity of the case, it was thought prudent to invoke emergency legislation in order to facilitate thorough investigations which would in turn assist the courts arrive at justice. The emergency legislation had since been revoked. All the detainees had been accorded their rights, except the right of movement,
- 8 - Press Release HR/CN/846 8 April 1998
BHUGYAL, of Worldview International Foundation, said the reports of the Special Rapporteurs on torture and religious intolerance and of the Working Group on disappearances had expressed concern over the situation of detainees in Tibet, indicating that detainees there remained denied of their human rights and that the overall improvement in human rights conditions had not improved. Although the working group had visited the prisons, it had been unable to ascertain their real situation and that of the prisoners. Nevertheless, the visit was an important opening. According to recent reports emerging from Tibet, several Tibetan prisoners who had spoken privately with the Working Goup had faced severe reprisals for raising peaceful slogans during the delegation's visit. It was unfortunate that the Working Group did not mention this in its report. It should ensure that the prisoners did not face torture or ill-treatment for their actions. The Group was urged to release the names of the 10 prisoners it had spoken with privately.
MARINA SIKORA, of the Transnational Radical Party, said Cuba had not adopted any measure to comply with the minimum international standards for the treatment of prisoners. Beatings, far from constituting isolated incidents, were used habitually and systematically by Cuban State agents as a means of punishment or intimidation. Particularly serious was the fact that complaints of mistreatment brought before the competent authorities never went anywhere. It was clear in the light of the facts that the Cuban State not only violated the principles and standards set forth in the various international human rights instruments, but that it broke its own laws.
MIGUEL ANGEL SANCHEZ, of the Federation des Associations pour la Defense et la Promotion des Droits de l'Homme, said the group supported the work of the Spanish High Court on the cases of Spaniards who had disappeared during the Argentinean and Chilean dictatorships. A positive resolution of those cases would signal a success for the fight against impunity. There was reliable evidence that the armed forces in Argentina and Chile had carried out genocide, torture, persecution and prolonged detention, acts that constituted crimes against humanity. It could not be considered that those crimes had been tried in Argentina and Chile because even though some persons had been tried, such proceedings had been ineffective: some cases had been discontinued, while some convicted defendants had been pardoned or given amnesty. Crimes against humanity were not subject to the statute of limitations. The victims and their relatives had the right to freedom, justice and reparation, and that could become possible with the court cases the High Court was hearing.
ANDREI ASANNIKOV, of the International League for Human Rights, said that despite the recommendations of Commission rapporteurs and of the Human Rights Committee, the situation in Belarus was getting worse. Mass arrests of demonstrators -- more than 20 arrested yesterday for demonstrating support for the independence of Belarus -- harassment and intimidation campaigns against political opponents of the regime, physical abuse of politicians, students,
- 9 - Press Release HR/CN/846 8 April 1998
journalists, non-governmental organizations activists, imprisonment of dissidents, long pre-trial detentions for political reasons, closure of independent media, censorship and direct control of media proved that Belarus lived under quasi-totalitarianism. The situation began to be established after the referendum of 1996, which was generally considered to be rigged, and had been followed by a Constitution imposed on the country by its president, thus sealing his monopoly on power. Recently the authorities had introduced further restrictions on freedom of expression. Belarus should be made to comply with international human rights obligations.
AKHYAD IDIGOV, of the Society of Threatened Peoples, said people of Caucasian origin were discriminated against and subjected to all forms of ill-treatment in the Russian Federation. The personnel of the Ministry of the Interior continued to torture the people they detained. With regard to the situation of Chechnyans, the Russian Federation did not implement the agreement signed with the Chechnyan authorities on 12 May 1997 following the end of the war. Instead, the Russian authorities had encircled the region militarily and cut off Chechnya from the rest of the world.
ALDO MORALES, of the Commission for the Defence of Human Rights in Central America, said although there were great problems in Central American countries over the independence of judges and lawyers, the group would refer solely to the situation in Guatemala. The Commission and the international community had made great efforts to ensure the success of the peace process in that country. However, there were shortcomings in the system of justice in Guatemala, where judges did not act independently. There was a lack of internal independence because the Supreme Court of Justice was empowered to appoint judges, magistrates of the peace and auxiliary officials; that led to hierarchial dependency contrary to international laws. There was also a lack of external independence because judges were highly compromised by other powers of the State, social groups and the media, which exerted strong pressures, especially in controversial cases, such as those of officials accused of violating human rights. Furthermore, Guatemalan judges were threatened with death and persecution in a number of cases.
LOUIS JOINET, of the Working Group on arbitrary detention, said a serious mistake should be corrected in the report on the visit to China; the list mentioned there of prisoners to be visited was not provided by the authorities but provided to the authorities. Also, as far as the Working Group knew, there was only one prisoner who had spoken out in public during the visit. Human Rights Watch had discussed the situation with him and had modified its position slightly, in a way acceptable to him. China had made a statement saying it would apply the recommendations made by the Working Group. He would see them next year, to see what had happened.
- 10 - Press Release HR/CN/846 8 April 1998
PARAM CUMARASWAMY, Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, said he had already stated at last year's session of the Commission why the report on his 1996 visit to Peru had been delayed. The delegation of Peru claimed the delay was of three years, but the visit had taken place in 1996. As to the claim by the delegation that the report included recent information on developments in the country, he would respond that he considered his mandate as a continuous one. To the allegation that the information on recent developments was based on data from third parties, he said he would appreciate comments from the Government of Peru on whether any of the points raised were incorrect. An advance copy of the draft of the report had been given to the Permanent Mission of Peru on 3 February this year, contrary to the allegation of the Peruvian delegation. He urged the Peruvian authorities to react to the comments and recommendations made in his report.
Right of Reply
NAUDY SUAREZ FIGUEROA (Venezuela) said sometimes a half truth misled people more than an outright lie. Such was the case when the International Observatory of Prisons made its statement about the penitentiary system in Venezuela yesterday. The Government was taking steps to correct past defects. According to a senior official, prisons in Venezuela were overcrowded; there were difficulties in legal proceedings; the badly prepared and ill-paid staff were open to corruption, and the traffic of arms and drugs in and out of jails had led to situations where prisoners themselves were victims. In the past three years, the Government had undertaken important initiatives, including a programme to build new prisons or enlarge and refurbish old ones. Also, justice was being made more speedy. A law was also being prepared that would punish torture by policemen, and there was a broad programme for the protection of human rights of prisoners, including the raising of their standard of living and making family visits easier. Non-governmental organizations could not ignore all that was being done. That was the other part of the truth that was not mentioned.
JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PLACIOS (Cuba) said the delegation wished to know if the Transnational Radical Party really was a non-governmental organizations. Cuba was surprised that this organization had accredited 60 persons to the Commission. Who was paying them? Where were they? What were their sources of funding? Cuba knew how much it cost to come to Geneva and spend many days during the Commission. In fact, Cuba knew who had sent them and how they were doing all this; Cuba would take the appropriate steps with the non-governmental organizations Committee to make sure this would not happen again and the Commission's credibility would not suffer from having to be subjected to such slanders.
* *** *