REPORTS ON MYANMAR, SUDAN PRESENTED TO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Press Release
HR/CN/862

REPORTS ON MYANMAR, SUDAN PRESENTED TO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

GENEVA, 16 April (UN Information Service) -- Special Rapporteurs presented the Commission on Human Rights this morning with their findings the status of fundamental rights and freedoms in Myanmar and the Sudan. The Commission also heard numerous allegations of problems in other countries as it carried on for a third day its debate on human rights situations throughout the world.

Rajsoomer Lallah, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, said that while some positive developments had taken place over the past year, they were small in comparison to the continued serious state of affairs in the country, and that denial of the exercise of political rights remained the root cause of most grave abuses committed. He said human rights violations in Myanmar included criminalization of any political activity that was not in support of the military regime and the continued practice of forced labour throughout the country -- in many cases using women, children and the elderly.

A representative of Myanmar charged that the report lacked balance and accuracy and was a ritual repetition of a litany of unproven allegations provided by sources hostile to the Government.

Gaspar Biro, Special Rapporteur on the situation in the Sudan, said there were indications of worsening treatment of women and children, increased restrictions on freedom of religion, and abuses and atrocities committed against religious communities and their leaders by agents of the Government or individuals known for their close relationships with the Government. He said requests from him for information on numerous detailed allegations of human rights abuses had gone unanswered by the Government and that hundreds of thousands might soon be starving in southern Sudan, in great part because the Government hampered relief efforts.

A Sudanese representative said in response that alleged human rights violations related to the broader context of the armed conflict in the south of the country, which the current Government, after major efforts, had largely resolved peacefully. He termed the Rapporteur's contention that the overall situation had not improved inaccurate and unfair, and charged that the

Rapporteur used the same language he had used in 1992, "without any effort to update that language to reflect the tremendous developments which have taken place".

The Minister of Justice of the Republic of the Congo delivered an address at 11:30 a.m. He described the country's recent political history, including two civil wars, and current progress towards re-establishing democracy and promoting human rights.

Also speaking at the meeting were representatives of the Russian Federation, Canada, Poland, Cuba, Sudan, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Australia, Iran, Portugal, Algeria, Croatia, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and Israel.

Statements

PIERRE NZE, Minister of Justice of the Republic of the Congo, said his Government attached the greatest importance to the Commission's work and to human rights matters. The situation of human rights in the country could be examined only in light of its political history in recent years. The country had embarked on democracy in 1990. A national conference had been followed by reforms and democratic, transparent elections. Unfortunately, the effort came to naught. A bloody repression and many deaths followed, along with massive displacements and ethnic purges, to the benefit of ethnically established militias. A second civil war followed in 1997. Confronted by a tyrannical regime that used all means to hang on to power, people resisted. During the conflict, the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity (OAU) fruitlessly sought to bring about a negotiated solution; a military solution finally had to be imposed. Unfortunately many violations were committed by members of the former armed militia, which had not surrendered weapons or disbanded as ordered. Other violations occurred in the course of self-defense by police. Attempting to restore the rule of law, the new Government had released a number of those held in detention; it nonetheless was committed to identifying and prosecuting those responsible for human rights violations. Only through truth and justice and solidarity could lasting peace be built. A forum for democracy and reconstruction had been held with the primary purpose of national reconciliation and resumption of the democratic process.

Today, no political party had been dissolved, and freedom of opinion and expression were guaranteed, the Minister said. Those promoting human rights were allowed to operate freely, and freedom of movement was allowed. During this critical period of reconstruction, the Government was emphasizing human rights; it also requested assistance from the United Nations to help it rebuild a country devastated by war.

- 3 - Press Release HR/CN/862 20 April 1998

Statements in Debate

MARGARET RASHIDI KABAMBA (Democratic Republic of the Congo), responding to the report on the Democratic Republic of the Congo compiled by the Special Rapporteur, (document E/CN.4/1998/65), said it had a disconcertingly aggressive tone and contained numerous errors and gratuitous remarks against the country. The Rapporteur simply denied the efforts of the current Government to promote human rights. All impartial observers recognized that the reign of impunity in the country was coming to an end; now all human rights abuses were tried and punished. Galloping inflation had been brought under control, displaying a respect for economic, social and cultural rights that went unacknowledged by the Special Rapporteur; women also were receiving better respect for their human rights. The country did not maintain that everything was perfect, but did maintain that most allegations against it were exaggerated or emanated from unreliable sources. The violations reported by the Special Rapporteur had not been committed by the new regime but by armed forces of the former dictatorial regime and by armed bandits.

RAJSOOMER LALLAH, Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Myanmar, presenting his report (document E/CN.4/1998/70), told the Commission that this year again, the authorities in Myanmar had not authorized him to enter the country and see the situation on the ground. His report was based on information gathered from governmental, intergovernmental and non-governmental sources, as well as individuals who had relevant information.

Mr. Lallah said a number of positive developments had taken place in Myanmar in the course of last year. The State had become a party to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, death sentences had been commuted, and the period of imprisonment in respect of certain offenses committed before 15 November 1997 had been reduced. However, those developments were inadequate when compared with the generally serious situation of human rights in the country. The representatives elected in the general elections of 1990 still had to be allowed to govern in accordance with the will expressed by the people. Moreover, their political activities continued to be severely restricted; they were also penalized by disproportionate sanctions. The denial of the exercise of political rights in accordance with generally accepted international norms remained the root cause of most grave violations of human rights in Myanmar. Also of concern was the practice of forced labour throughout the country, involving the old, women and children.

U AYE (Myanmar) said that Mr. Rajsoomer Lallah's report contained some positive elements, however few they might be, concerning interaction between the Government and legal political parties; cooperation the Government extended to United Nations bodies, and the order which dealt with the commutation of death sentences. However, Mr. Lallah had failed to inject some measure of balance and accuracy in the report, which was based primarily on

- 4 - Press Release HR/CN/862 20 April 1998

misinformation provided by sources hostile to the Government; it was a ritual repetition of a litany of unproven allegations. The Special Rapporteur had submitted that due to difficulties encountered, he had not had direct contacts with the Government or the people. Yet he proceeded to draw conclusions based on hearsay and information by elements opposed to the Government, while giving only superficial treatment to the wealth of information given by authoritative sources. It must be remembered that the Government was committed to fulfilling the aspirations of the people for building a peaceful and prosperous multiparty democratic society in Myanmar.

GASPAR BIRO, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Sudan, said he continuously received detailed information on all categories of violations and human rights abuses he had addressed in four previous reports (see document E/CN.4/1998/66). In most of the concrete cases brought to its attention, the Government preferred to remain silent. One of the most notorious examples in this regard was an incident last December in front of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) office in Khartoum, when security forces brutally disrupted a peaceful demonstration by some 50 women. The response of the Government to an appeal for an investigation signed by four Special Rapporteurs of the Commission was completely inadequate, given the gravity of the incident.

His overall assessment was that the human rights situation had not improved, Mr. Biro said. In some areas there was a significant deterioration, including in treatment of women, the rights of the child, restrictions on freedom of religion, and abuses and atrocities committed against religious communities and their leaders by agents of the Government or individuals known for their close relationship with the Government. Hundreds of thousands were starving in southern Sudan, yet the Government impeded relief efforts in various ways.

Undoubtedly there were positive developments in terms of cooperation with the Commission and himself, Mr. Biro said. These should be supported by the international community. At the same time, all should not forget that such cooperation was only one part of a very complex and sensitive human rights situation in the Sudan. He was of the opinion that there was now a serious chance to reach concrete, practical results in relation to some aspects of cooperation and work within existing human rights mechanisms; he believed also that the process raised matters beyond investigating and reporting and in some aspects called for a different approach than the Special Rapporteur's mandate contained. Therefore he had decided to conclude his five years of work as a Special Rapporteur, although he also felt strongly that the mandate should be renewed and strengthened -- because merely to report on the situation in the Sudan at this point was little more than contemplation.

ABUEL GASIM ABDELWAHID IDRIS (Sudan) said his delegation maintained that the alleged human rights violations in the Sudan related to the broader

- 5 - Press Release HR/CN/862 20 April 1998

context of the armed conflict in the south, which the current Government had been working to resolve peacefully since assuming power in 1989. The Government's efforts were successfully concluded by the Sudan Peace Agreement on 21 April 1997 with all rebel factions except that of John Garang. The Agreement was given immediate effect by Constitutional Decree No. 14. All controversial issues were resolved in the Agreement to the satisfaction of all parties. The Special Rapporteur's conclusion that the situation of human rights had not improved was not an accurate reflection of the facts. It was most unfair of him to keep using the same language he had used in 1992, without any effort to reflect the tremendous developments which had taken place. Sudan called upon the Commission to disregard all unconfirmed allegations contained in the report.

BORIS KRYLOV (Russian Federation) said his delegation had already referred to the complex problems that needed to be resolved in the Russian Federation. There was a need to improve the activities of law enforcement bodies, complete the work of the judiciary and introduce the concept of human rights into the society. The Russian Federation would also continue to protect the interests of its Russian-speaking compatriots living outside the homeland. The Russian Federation was also concerned about the situation of human rights in the former Yugoslavia; the international community could do more to guarantee human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Concerning the Cypriot problem, the Russian Federation advocated a political settlement based on territorial sovereignty. It was especially concerned about the restriction of freedom of movement in the north and the violation of the human rights of Greek Cypriots. As before, the Commission's attention was focused on Afghanistan -- the unending news of gross violations of humanitarian laws, including increased discrimination against women and girls, was just part of the problem. Most of the gross violations were committed by the Taliban. Russia was prepared to continue to grant humanitarian aid to Afghanistan's population and called on all parties, especially the Taliban, not to hinder the process of humanitarian deliveries. Another critical situation was that of the Great Lakes region. Russia believed that the future of human rights in the region depended on the solution of the problem of impunity.

ROSS HYNES (Canada) said that all too often lack of progress in human rights reflected a failure of States in their duties to promote and protect such rights; the regime in Iraq ruled not by the will of the people but through intimidation and violent force. Fortunately those -- like Burma -- which repudiated democratic election results and clung to power through repression, were in a steadily diminishing minority. Others ignored international standards for decent treatment, a shocking example being Afghanistan, where the Taliban regime brazenly violated the rights of women; Iran's relentless persecution of the Baha'is was another illustration. It was inconsistent for countries to say that human rights were interrelated and indivisible, as China did, when basic tenets such as freedom of expression and

- 6 - Press Release HR/CN/862 20 April 1998

association were not respected; in Indonesia, treatment of trade unionists and recourse to controversial subversion legislation were not consistent with the principle of all human rights for all -- the only foundation for a durable solution in East Timor. Serious situations also existed in Sudan, Nigeria, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Algeria, Sri Lanka, the Great Lakes region of Africa, the former Yugoslavia and Somalia.

KRZYSTOF JAKUBOWSKI (Poland) said human rights violations were perpetrated for various reasons, not all directly and unequivocally attributable to governments. Different situations warranted a different tenor of public debate in the Commission. It was one thing when totalitarian or authoritarian regimes deliberately committed human rights violations; it was quite another matter when abuses occurred for reasons other than deliberate governmental commission or omission. In authoritarianism, the usurpation of power of the ruling clique took precedent over the rights of citizens, as the state of affairs in Iraq and Nigeria, among other countries, testified. Totalitarian and authoritarian regimes would not in good faith accept the principle of international cooperation towards a greater respect for human rights; such cooperation would lead to democracy, which was the best protection for human rights. Democracy was the trend in Europe following the end of the cold war, although Poland deplored that the trend was making no headway in neighbouring Belarus.

MARIA DE LOS ANGELES FLOREZ PRIDA (Cuba) said the work of the Commission this year had seemed to be advancing in an environment of apparent dialogue and cooperation. However, the item being tackled today had prompted rhetoric loaded with unfair selectivity, unwarranted politicization and lack of objectivity, creating a climate of mistrust and accusations. It was amazing that the Commission had never condemned a rich country, although there was more than enough evidence of violations by the wealthy. For example, the "American Dream" remained a tragic nightmare for vast sectors of the United States population; United States society could no longer conceal the most grievous injustices, extreme inequalities and the most blatant discrimination affecting dozens of millions of Afro-Americans, Latin Americans, Asians and its own indigenous peoples. In Europe, there were diverse situations of human rights violations including racism, xenophobia and violations of the rights of immigrants and minorities. Cuba for its part was proud of its democracy. The anti-Cuban campaign had been demonstrated to be designed to legitimize the unjustifiable economic and political aggression of the United States Government. Cuba would continue to move forward to improve further its socialist democracy and to continue to guarantee for its people the enjoyment of every human right.

ALI A. ELNASRI (Sudan) said controversial attitudes in dealing with human rights issues would not only discourage and frustrate the process of protection and promotion of human rights, but could also lead to the creation of unnecessary tension between States and among members of the civil

- 7 - Press Release HR/CN/862 20 April 1998

societies. The Government of Sudan had taken upon itself the task of relentlessly pursuing the promotion and protection of the human rights situation in the country. The signing of the Peace Agreement in April of last year and the conclusion of both the Nuba Mountain and Fashoda Peace Agreements constituted milestones in the Government's pursuit of a lasting and peaceful solution to the conflict in the south of the country. The Agreements had granted the right to self-determination to the people of the south and fully ensured other fundamental rights. Another milestone was the constitutional process that would lead to the adoption of the Permanent Constitution of the Sudan; one of the most important features of the new Constitution was its bill of rights, which contained many of the provisions of international human rights instruments.

SAVITRI KUNADI (India) said her country had consistently upheld the universality of the rights of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, there remained several factors which challenged their universality, starting with arguments supporting cultural relativism and the exclusivist claims of the proponents of the "clash of civilizations" approach. Those challenges also included, among others, neglect of the indivisibility and interdependence of all rights and the prevalence of racism, xenophobia and extreme and narrow forms of nationalism. Within the Commission, selectivity resulting from politicization and pressures generated by condemnation had brought acrimony and confrontation to its discourse. Elements of spotlighting required to be balanced with persuasion, introspection and technical cooperation to yield result-oriented options. That did not imply that the accountability of States must be forsaken; perhaps better results could be achieved by encouraging self-criticism and positive change and by offering assistance for national capacity-building to sustain democracy and rule of law. India did not pretend that the Government had been able to solve all problems. For example, there remained specific areas where economic and social grievances had manifested themselves in violent terms. India's approach would continue to address the underlying causes of problems through dialogue, a search for political solutions, and resort to democratic institutions.

AKRAM ZAKI (Pakistan) said the worst violators of human rights were States that ignored international human rights instruments they had signed and were occupying powers, relentlessly engaged in denying the occupied peoples' right to self-determination -- as in Kosovo, Palestine and Kashmir. The key challenge of the international community was to address these violations by occupying States; it must persist with careful monitoring of such violations; must catalogue, in clinical detail, and publicize widely, these violations to strip off the mask of civilized behaviour that was hypocritically worn by occupying States; and must exert tangible diplomatic and economic pressure. The most egregious human rights violations continued in occupied Jammu and Kashmir; there had been thousands of killings in cold blood by Indian security forces and thousands of rapes; there was little judicial recourse against

- 8 - Press Release HR/CN/862 20 April 1998

these violations; there was torture, extrajudicial killing and custodial death. The Commission must undertake an impartial investigation of violations there to determine if these qualified as crimes against humanity; the international criminal court should be empowered to punish perpetrators of such crimes; monitors should be sent to the region, along with relevant Special Rapporteurs, to get a first-hand assessment of the situation.

DOMINGOS POLICARPO (Indonesia) said a certain group of countries seemed to feel privileged to assume the role of both judge and jury in passing judgment on a number of developing countries and qualifying them as violators of human rights. That approach might result in destroying the genuine dialogue necessary to bring about international cooperation aimed at promoting and protecting all human rights. A balanced, objective and comprehensive consideration and judgement of the situation in any country should take into account the significant progress and positive development achieved by the country concerned. That implied that the efforts to generally understand and implement human rights in accordance with the state of each country's social, economic and political development still needed to be improved. As for statements made by some Member States and non-governmental organizations on the situation of human rights in Indonesia, it was true that, from time to time, Indonesia received communications from relevant United Nations human rights mechanisms with regard to allegations of torture, arbitrary detention and involuntary disappearance in Indonesia, including its province of East Timor. It would be preposterous to claim that human rights violations never occurred; they did occur occasionally and the authorities always did their utmost to bring the perpetrators to justice.

JOHN B. CAMPBELL (Australia) said his country remained concerned about the human rights situation throughout Afghanistan, particularly the strict social policies imposed by the Taliban which impacted negatively on the human rights of all Afghans but most acutely impinged on the rights of women and girls. Australia also shared the profound concern of the rest of the international community about the alarming situation in Algeria. Regarding Burma, Australia had seen some positive, modest developments. Similarly, China had made welcome progress in the realization of economic and social rights; and Australia was encouraged by a number of positive developments in human rights observance in Indonesia. However, the re-emergence of ethnic tension in the Balkans was a matter of deep regret for Australia. In South Asia, the country encouraged the Government in Sri Lanka to ensure human rights observance in a difficult security environment.

ALI KHORRAM (Iran) said his Government endeavoured to treat its citizens with mercy, love and kindness. President Khatami had said in an address that in civil society, personal or group dictatorship or even the tyranny of the majority and elimination of the minority had no place. The Government sought to be the servant of its people and not the master, and in any case was accountable to the people whom God had entitled to determine their own

- 9 - Press Release HR/CN/862 20 April 1998

destiny; it was not only Muslims who were considered citizens and given rights; all were, within the framework of law and order. This was a blueprint for action, and since taking office in August 1997, the President had launched various initiatives to carry it out. The Government had not achieved its ends and did not wish to paint a rosy picture of the situation; it had a long way to go; but it solemnly asserted that it had done a great deal and was committed to continuing to build on its progress; the response to its remarkable and invaluable undertakings should be international appreciation and encouragement; anything less than that would indicate the supremacy of political and economic considerations over concerns for human rights.

GONCALO DE SANTA CLARA GOMES (Portugal) said Indonesia's failure to comply with the Commission's recommendations had led to the worsening of the human rights situation in East Timor. Recent developments in Indonesia raised fears about further deterioration, combined with increasing hardship caused by the economic crisis in the region. Despite appeals from the international community, Indonesia had made no progress concerning the release of East Timorese political prisoners, some of whom were serving long prison terms. East Timorese taken into military or police custody continued to be subjected to torture and ill-treatment, and they were routinely denied access to legal counsel, medical treatment and to their families. In addition, credible international organizations continued to be barred from the territory. The international community could no longer turn a blind eye to the uncooperative attitude of the Government of Indonesia. The improvement of the human rights situation was integral to the achievement of a just, comprehensive and internationally acceptable solution.

MOHAMED HASSAINE (Algeria) said following the 1994 political process involving all parties which rejected violence, Algeria had reinforced legal institutions, including a separation of powers. Algeria had set up mechanisms to defend human rights because it was convinced of the relationship between the rule of law and human rights. The Government had also adhered to international instruments on human rights and had, for several years, been cooperating with various United Nations bodies to monitor human rights not covered by treaties. Algeria stressed that it was not going through a human rights crisis; rather, it was fighting barbarous and atrocious deeds by terrorists who frequently benefited from asylum in neighbouring countries. Algeria rejected manoeuvres which attempted to explain the acts of terrorists. Terrorism was a direct threat to all democratic States, especially countries in transition; there should not be a selective element in approaching how terrorism affected different countries. The Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women had been the first to raise the issue of responsibility of non-State actors for violations of human rights; other bodies should follow their path. The world could not continue to avoid addressing human rights violations by terrorist groups on the pretext that only States could be held accountable. Algeria regretted that the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial,

- 10 - Press Release HR/CN/862 20 April 1998

summary and arbitrary executions was still uncertain about the identity of the terrorists responsible for the massacres in Algeria, when the terrorists themselves had claimed responsibility for the attacks.

DARKO BEKIC (Croatia) said the Republic had been under the mandate of special rapporteurs for six years, and the human rights situation had changed substantially because of constant, constructive, and fruitful dialogues. There had been frequent visits to the country; but now it seemed that the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation in the region should be adjusted to fit existing circumstances. The reporting mechanism had proven to be too slow and discrepancies frequently occurred between facts presented in reports and the current situation in Croatia. The Government, for example, felt that it was now a country in transition and could be fully oriented towards strengthening the institutions of civil society; there had been many positive developments in the country. The country raised the question of whether it should be considered in the same manner as previously before the Commission; it also was subject to numerous United Nations monitoring mechanisms, which had considerable overlap and duplication. Croatia favoured continued cooperation with the United Nations in human rights but under a different mandate, one involving technical assistance and cooperation.

KIM SONG CHOL (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) said that selectivity and double standards had compelled his country to withdraw from the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights last August. Had the sponsors of a resolution against his county shown an attitude of dialogue and cooperation, the serious consequence that withdrawal from the Covenant represented would not have materialized. Those countries had forced the adoption of the resolution in a surprise manner, selecting only his country from about 50 States parties to the Covenant that had delayed the submission of reports on implementation of the Covenant for technical and other relevant reasons. No nation on earth would ever tolerate others infringing upon its hard-won sovereignty and dignity. Some maintained that the Government's withdrawal from the Covenant was not possible in legal terms; that was merely sophistry in order to claim that the application of selectivity and double standards was justifiable to violate other's sovereignty and dignity; that upside-down theory could never work in any part of the world. It seemed that the West thought it alone had the right to point fingers and attack other countries. The West would have to cultivate moral customs, to try to see the realities of other countries from their perspective.

YOSEF LAMDAN (Israel) read out a recent decision by Israel's Ministerial Committee for National Security, which stated that Israel would withdraw from southern Lebanon with "appropriate security arrangements". This was a serious, action-oriented initiative and was not a declaratory and diversionary tactic, he said. It signalled Israel's willingness to withdraw in short order from southern Lebanon. Despite some initial negativism on their part, Israel trusted that Lebanon and Syria would seek to explore the seriousness of its

- 11 - Press Release HR/CN/862 20 April 1998

intentions. The international community could assist in this endeavour; the Commission could play a constructive role if it decided simply to take note of the draft resolution on the subject instead of bringing it to a vote.

SOLI J. SORABJEE, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Nigeria, said the Nigerian Government, in its response to his report (see Press Release HR/CN/861), had not addressed any of the major issues of human rights violations he had raised. Instead of meeting with facts and figures the conclusions he had reached, the Government had made a statement that the report was written for him by human rights groups in London and Geneva. That was an imaginary and utterly false allegation. The report had been written by him in New Delhi; its language and findings were his own. He had made the report with a full sense of his mandate and responsibilities; it was an unworthy allegation to accuse him of a "hatchet job". He was not infallible, and he welcomed constructive criticism, but Nigeria had only made defamatory statements.

* *** *