In progress at UNHQ

HR/CN/851

COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS EXPRESSES CONCERN AT GROWING RACISM AND XENOPHOBIA AGAINST MIGRANT WORKERS

9 April 1998


Press Release
HR/CN/851


COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS EXPRESSES CONCERN AT GROWING RACISM AND XENOPHOBIA AGAINST MIGRANT WORKERS

19980409 Adopts Resolutions on Unilateral Coercive Measures, Illicit Dumping of Toxic Waste, Indigenous Populations, Structural Adjustment Policies

(Reissued as received.)

GENEVA, 9 April (UN Information Service) -- The Commission on Human Rights this morning expressed deep concern at the growing manifestations of racism, xenophobia, and other forms of discrimination and inhuman and degrading treatment against migrant workers in different parts of the world and invited Governments to undertake further research on the causes and consequences of violence against women migrant workers.

The Commission also invited Governments to put in place penal and criminal sanctions to punish perpetrators of violence against women migrants and to consider adopting appropriate legal measures against intermediaries who deliberately encouraged clandestine movement of workers.

The moves by the Commission came as it adopted eight resolutions and one decision on human rights and migrants, unilateral coercive measures, the adverse effects of the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes, the effects of structural adjustment policies and indigenous people.

Through the measures, the Commission also urged States to promote and protect rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities and to take appropriate legal and practical measures to that end.

In a resolution adopted by a vote of 33 to 14, with 6 abstentions, the Commission condemned the increased rate of illicit dumping and movement of toxic and dangerous products and urged all Governments to take appropriate preventive measures. It also renewed the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the subject for three more years to allow her to undertake a global study.

After another roll-call vote, the Commission called on all States to refrain from adopting or implementing unilateral measures of a coercive nature which created obstacles to trade relations among States. Among the countries voting against that text, the United States said each nation had the right to decide which nation it would trade with and the conditions under which that trade should take place.

Before voting on draft texts began this morning, it was announced that the Commission, acting under the procedure set out by Economic and Social Council resolution 1503, had examined in closed session yesterday the human rights situation in Chad, Gambia, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Paraguay, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone and Yemen. Commission Chairman, Jacob Selebi (South Africa), said consideration of the situation in Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Paraguay, Peru, Saudi Arabia and Yemen had been discontinued.

Action on Draft Proposals

In a resolution on human rights and unilateral coercive measures (E/CN.4/1998/L.9), approved by a roll-call vote of 37 in favour to 7 against, with 8 abstaining, the Commission called upon all States to refrain from adopting or implementing unilateral measures not in accordance with international law and the Charter of the United Nations, in particular those of a coercive nature with extraterritorial effects, which created obstacles to trade relations among States, thus impeding the full realization of internationally accepted human rights; rejected the application of such measures as tools for political or economic pressure against any country, particularly against developing countries, because of their negative effects on vast sectors of their populations, among them children, women and the elderly; reaffirmed the right of all peoples to self-determination, by which they freely determined their political status and freely pursued their development; and reaffirmed that essential goods such as food and medicines should not be used as tools for political coercion, and that in no case should a people be deprived of its own means of sustenance.

The vote was as follows:

In favour: Argentina, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Congo, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guinea, India, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay and Venezuela.

Against: Canada, Germany, Japan, Luxembourg, Republic of Korea, United Kingdom and United States.

- 3 - Press Release HR/CN/851 9 April 1998

Abstentions: Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Poland and Ukraine.

NANCY RUBIN (United States) said her country would vote against L.9 because each nation had the right to decide which nation it would trade with and the conditions under which that trade should take place.

In a resolution on adverse effects of the illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights (E/CN.4/1998/L.20/Rev.1), approved by a roll-call vote of 33 in favour to 14 against, with 6 abstaining, the Commission categorically condemned the increased rate of such dumping; urged all Governments to take appropriate measures to preventing such illegal movement and dumping of wastes; urged the international community, relevant United Nations bodies, and the secretariat for the Basel Convention to give appropriate support to developing countries, upon their request, in their efforts to implement existing protective instruments against such transport and dumping; decided to renew the mandate of the Special Rapporteur for a period of three years in order that she could continue to undertake a global multidisciplinary and comprehensive study of existing problems of and solutions to illicit traffic in and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes, in particular in developing countries, with a view to making concrete recommendations and proposals on adequate measures to control, reduce, and eradicate these phenomena; reiterated its request that she include comprehensive information in her next report on persons killed or injured in developing countries through these heinous activities; and encouraged her to continue to provide Governments with an appropriate opportunity to respond to allegations transmitted to her and to have their observations reflected in her report.

The voting was as follows:

In favour: Argentina, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Congo, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guinea, India, Indonesia, Madagascar, Mali, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay and Venezuela.

Against: Belarus, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Poland, Russian Federation, Ukraine, United Kingdom and United States.

Abstentions: Austria, Guatemala, Ireland, Malaysia, Philippines and Republic of Korea.

NANCY RUBIN (United States) said that while appreciating the extensive consultations undertaken in the development of the draft resolution, the

- 4 - Press Release HR/CN/851 9 April 1998

country was of the opinion the issue of toxic waste was a serious one, but should be addressed by those organizations most effectively equipped to deal with it; those were the Basel Convention and the Commission on Sustainable Development. The United States did not see how the Commission on Human Rights could deal with the subject in a meaningful way.

HAMIDON ALI (Malaysia) said it would abstain because it did not believe that the issue of illicit movement and dumping of toxic and dangerous products should come under the purview of the Commission on Human Rights. Malaysia accepted that there was a human rights dimension to the issue, but there were other bodies, such as the Basel Convention, which were more competent to deal with it.

WILHELM HÖYNCK (Germany) said the country fully shared the concerns expressed in the resolution and agreed there were serious problems with this issue; it hoped that efforts for consensus-building on the subject would continue.

DENIS LEPATAN (Philippines) said his country shared the concern of its African brothers regarding the illicit dumping of toxic waste and appreciated that there was a human rights dimension to the issue. However, the Philippines felt that this issue was best addressed under the Basel Convention.

In a measure on the effects of structural adjustment policies on the full enjoyment of human rights (E/CN.4/1998/L.31), adopted by a roll-call vote of 36 in favour to 14 against, with 3 abstentions, the Commission decided to authorize its open-ended working group on the subject to meet for one week, at least four weeks before the fifty-fifth session of the Commission, to consider the report of the independent expert and the comments received thereon and to report to the Commission; requested the independent expert to submit his report for circulation and comment for consideration by the working group; and recommended a draft decision to that effect to the Economic and Social Council for adoption.

The voting was as follows:

In favour: Argentina, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Botswana, Brazil, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Congo, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guinea, India, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay and Venezuela.

- 5 - Press Release HR/CN/851 9 April 1998

Against: Austria, Belarus, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Russian Federation, Ukraine, United Kingdom and United States.

Abstentions: Czech Republic, Peru and Poland.

SHIGEKI SUMI (Japan) said the country would vote against the measure if it was put to a vote. Japan attached great importance to structural adjustment policies, and recognized that they should be moulded in a consistent manner with human rights. However, Japan did not feel that the measure and the independent expert referred to were appropriate for the task; the country also regretted that the resolution had been tabled this year, during a time of economic crisis in South-East Asia. Under the circumstances, the measure seemed inadequate, misleading, and insufficient.

In a resolution on the Working Group on Indigenous Populations of the Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities (E/CN.4/1998/L.22), the Commission, among other things, urged the working group to continue its comprehensive review of developments and welcomed its plans to give priority at its next session to the theme of education and language; recommended to the Economic and Social Council that the working group be authorized to meet for five working days prior to the fiftieth session of the Subcommission; welcomed the affirmation by the General Assembly that a major objective of the International Decade of the World's Indigenous People was the adoption of a declaration on the rights of indigenous people and the possible establishment of a permanent forum for indigenous people within the United Nations system; requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to consider organizing a workshop for research and higher education institutions focusing on indigenous issues in education; recommended that the High Commissioner, when developing programmes within the framework of the International Decade, give due regard to human-rights training for indigenous people; and invited United Nations financial and development institutions to give increased priority and resources to improving the conditions of indigenous people, and to launch special projects in collaboration with indigenous people, to strengthen their community-level initiatives and to facilitate the exchange of information and expertise among indigenous people and relevant experts.

In a resolution on the working group of the Commission to elaborate a draft declaration on the rights of indigenous people in accordance with paragraph 5 of General Assembly resolution 49/214 of 23 December 1994 (E/CN.4/1998/L.23), adopted by consensus, the Commission welcomed the decisions of the Economic and Social Council approving the participation of organizations of indigenous people in the work of the working group, and urged the Council to process all pending applications as soon as possible; recommended that the working group meet for 10 working days prior to the

- 6 - Press Release HR/CN/851 9 April 1998

fifty-fifth session of the Commission, the cost to be met from within existing resources; encouraged organizations of indigenous people which had not already registered to participate and which wished to do so to apply for authorization; and recommended a draft resolution incorporating these matters for approval by the Economic and Social Council.

The Commission then took up, but deferred action on, a draft resolution on a permanent forum for indigenous people in the United Nations system (E/CN.4/1998/L.24), through which it would, taking note of the recommendations of the second workshop on the topic and of the General Assembly, decide to establish an open-ended inter-sessional ad hoc working group from within existing overall United Nations resources, to elaborate and consider further proposals for the possible establishment of such a permanent forum; decide that participation in the working group would be according to the same procedures as agreed upon for the working group established in accordance with Commission resolution 1995/32; and decide that non-governmental organizations of indigenous people which had the right to participate in the working group established in accordance with resolution 1995/32 automatically be granted right to participate in the new ad hoc working group.

JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba) said that draft resolution L.24 could be an illustration of the difficulties that arose for many delegations here in trying to establish real coordination and cooperation taking into account all views in the room on a subject of importance. Cuba wondered if some things could be clarified: establishing an open-ended inter-sessional working group "within existing resources" meant what? And what, exactly, would such a working group do, since it seemed it would study a whole series of issues still to be defined? Would it be administrative or deliberative in function?

A representative of the Secretariat said substantive servicing to the group would be provided by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and would be absorbed by the regular budget. Regarding the provision of conference services, it would also be absorbed by the regular "conferencing" budget. The work would be carried out by human rights officers who were part of the regular staff of the Office of the High Commissioner.

TYGE LEHMANN (Denmark) said Denmark had, in the light of extensive open-ended consultations, proposed to focus on the setting up of a permanent forum for indigenous peoples within the United Nations system, a question which should not just be discussed by workshops here and there. It was time to look at the permanent forum through an ad hoc group that would take up concrete proposals; it was not correct to say that it was not known what such a group would discuss. It was also clear in the text how participation in the ad hoc group would be. Denmark believed that there was a misunderstanding, deliberate or not.

- 7 - Press Release HR/CN/851 9 April 1998

DANIEL BERNARD (France) said it was not clear if the resolution truly could be carried out within existing resources, and if the policy was to defer consideration of drafts with possible new expenses involved, was it fair to consider resolutions such as this one, simply because it was termed "within existing resources"?

JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba) said France had put its finger on what Cuba wanted to say: there was a need to clarify how the expenses for the ad hoc group could be absorbed by regular resources. This morning, Cuba had spoken on the lack of transparency, and this matter was of extreme concern to the delegation. Cuba requested very clear explanations, if possible in writing.

The delegation added that it was not clear, still, what activities of the Centre were going to result in additional expenses and which were not; as for staff time, if they worked on this subject they correspondingly would have to give up time they would have spent working on something else, such as other matters related to indigenous peoples. In any event, it might be useful if one could go into the substance of the text of this draft resolution and agree on a text that would provide a solution for these issues.

TYGE LEHMANN (Denmark) said the Commission had just been told about how the financial implications would be absorbed. If it was a matter of Cuba and Denmark sitting down and looking at the substance of the draft resolution in order to do away with the financial implications, then Denmark was not ready to do it. Denmark appealed to the Chairman so that the Commission could adopt the resolution by consensus.

In a decision recommended by the Subcommission on protection of the heritage of indigenous people (see the report of the Subcommission, document E/CN.4/1998/2), the Commission requested the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to organize a seminar on the draft principles and guidelines for the protection of the heritage of indigenous people.

In a resolution adopted by consensus on the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (E/CN.4/1998/L.27), the Commission expressed its deep concern at the growing manifestations of racism, xenophobia, and other forms of discrimination and inhuman and degrading treatment against migrant workers in different parts of the world; urged countries of destination to review and adopt measures to prevent the excessive use of force and to ensure that their police forces and competent migration authorities complied with basic standards relating to the decent treatment of migrant workers and their families; and called upon member States to consider the possibility of ratifying or acceding to the Convention as a matter of priority and expressed hope that it would enter into force at an early date.

- 8 - Press Release HR/CN/851 9 April 1998

In a resolution on migrants and human rights (E/CN.4/1998/L.28), adopted by consensus, the Commission acknowledged that the principles and standards embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights applied to everyone, including migrants; requested States effectively to promote and protect the human rights of all migrants; noted with appreciation the unprecedentedly large response of Governments to the questionnaire on the subject sent to them by the working group of intergovernmental experts; and decided to reconvene the working group for two periods of five working days each prior to the fifty-fifth session of the Commission.

In a resolution on migrants and human rights (E/CN.4/1998/L.30), adopted by consensus, the Commission invited Governments, particularly of sending and receiving countries, to undertake further research on the causes and consequences of violence against women migrant workers, including the causes of outflow of women migrant workers, and to develop appropriate national data-collection methodologies on the subject; encouraged the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to consider developing a general recommendation on the situation of women migrant workers; requested the working group of intergovernmental experts on the human rights of migrants to elaborate recommendations to strengthen the promotion, protection, and implementation of the rights of women migrant workers; called upon concerned Governments to put in place penal and criminal sanctions to punish perpetrators of violence against women migrant workers and to provide the victims with a full range of immediate assistance; invited States to consider adopting appropriate legal measure against intermediaries who deliberately encouraged clandestine movement of workers and who exploited women migrant workers; and encouraged States to consider signing and ratifying or acceding to the International Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, as well as to the Slavery Convention of 1926.

* *** *

For information media. Not an official record.