SPEAKERS IN THIRD COMMITTEE STRESS IMPERATIVES OF OBJECTIVITY, NON-SELECTIVITY IN CONSIDERATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS SITUTIONS

Press Release
GA/SHC/3614

SPEAKERS IN THIRD COMMITTEE STRESS IMPERATIVES OF OBJECTIVITY, NON-SELECTIVITY IN CONSIDERATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS SITUTIONS

The clash of perspectives on human rights issues was the focus of vigorous debate this afternoon as the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) continued its consideration of issues related to human rights.

The representative of Cuba began by listing violations of human rights in countries that had criticized others. He said the United States suffered from racial targeting, lack of equality for women and inaccessibility of health care. The European Union had listed problems in 48 countries, forgetting to mention that almost all were former colonies, with current problems and conflicts originating in the violence of conquest, the plunder of resources and the imposition of absurd borders. Europe, in addition, was today allowing neo-Nazi parties to spring up. In Australia, discrimination and segregation of the indigenous population continued, while Canada continued to deny the rights of the indigenous people it had nearly exterminated.

The representative of Eritrea said that promoting and protecting human rights was a matter for international attention. The international community must not only respect the provisions of human rights instruments, but ensure that others respected them as well. Also, all violations must be condemned, regardless of who committed the action against whom. And finally, factors such as political alliances must not overshadow human rights considerations, particularly if peripheral concerns involved incentives such as the greed associated with arms sales.

Exercising his right of reply to Canada's account of conflict in his country, the representative of Sri Lanka said there would always be human rights violations in a conflict situation. However, in a small country such as his, where guerrilla-style warfare and terrorist tactics were rife, criticism only exacerbated an already difficult situation. Further, when armed groups attacked from inside countries, the international community had a duty to refrain from encouraging such activity through arms sales or by offering the services of criminal networks.

Addressing the sensitivity of poverty eradication and the right to development, the Special Representative of the World Bank's Geneva Office said the conceptual debate must continue with rigour, so as to avoid the perception that conditionality and sanctions were being brought about. In addition, failing to recognize that the right to development was an intractable concept was both counterproductive and dangerous. It also hid under the rug some key

Third Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/SHC/3614 44th Meeting (PM) 2 November 2000

issues for developing countries, including inequalities beyond income disparities.

Also speaking on general aspects of human rights were the representatives of the Russian Federation, Cyprus, Greece, Ukraine and Iran.

Others speaking in exercise of the right of reply were the representatives of Kyrgyzstan, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Latvia, Israel, Turkey, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Palestine, Cyprus and Estonia.

Also this afternoon, the Committee heard the representative of Belarus introduce a draft resolution on measures against neo-Nazism and related ideologies.

Before ending the meeting, the Chairwoman again appealed for consensus on the drafts before the Committee, particularly with regard to the advancement of women, on which the Committee had always taken action without a vote. In light of the Millennium Summit’s identification of gender equality and the empowerment of women as effective ways to combat social ills and stimulate development, she said the Committee could be expected to agree on the role of women in the future of the planet. From the perspective of Committee tradition and Summit adherence, it was a consensus issue for the new millennium.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Friday, 3 November, to continue its discussion of human rights issues and to consider resolutions on various aspects of the work before it.

Third Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/SHC/3614 44th Meeting (PM) 2 November 2000

Committee Work Programme

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met this afternoon to continue its deliberation of human rights issues, including approaches, human rights situations, the 1993 Vienna Declaration and the High Commissioner's report. (For background, see Press Release GA/SHC/3603 of 24 October.)

The Committee also has before it a draft resolution expected to be introduced. Sponsored by Belarus, the draft on measures to be taken against neo-Nazi activities and related ideologies and practices based on racial or ethnic discrimination or superiority (document A/C.3/55/L.25/Rev.1) would have the Assembly again resolutely condemn such activities and express its determination to resist them. It would affirm that all States were responsible for combating those activities and would call on governments to promote and encourage respect for human rights as well as to promote awareness of the need to fight hateful ideologies. It would urge States to institute measures for the eradication of such activities and would request the Secretary-General to include a listing of such measures in his report to the 2001 World Conference against racism.

Introduction of Draft Resolution

The representative of Belarus introduced a draft resolution on measures to be taken against neo-Nazi activities and any ideologies and practices based on racial or ethnic discrimination or superiority (document A/C.3/55/L.25/Rev.1).

SERGEY N KAREV, (Russian Federation) said the interconnectedness between peoples and States was growing, and it was necessary for human rights to become a uniting factor in the life of the global community. To bring that about would mean freeing human rights issues from a double standard that, in practice, attempted to justify the selfishness of “real politics” and the doctrine of “limited sovereignty” as issues of concern for the security of individuals. For an example of that “contrary approach”, one needed only look at the report of the Special Rapporteur on the humanitarian situation in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and study the tragedy of Kosovo. The ethnic cleansing of thousands of Serbs, extremist attacks and robberies, as well as abuse of power by armed clans, had converted Kosovo into a beachhead for the expansion of the illicit drug trade in Europe. The Russian Federation could not accept the fact that the elections in Kosovo had excluded the Serbian population and other minorities from the democratic process. The Federation was firmly in favour of the full implementation of Security Council Resolution 1244, for the establishment of a democratic, multi-ethnic society in Kosovo, as well as a speedy start to political negotiations on Kosovo’s status within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

He went on to say that the Middle East was once again caught in the midst of violence. Russia, a co-sponsor of the peace process, had persistently called upon all parties to take concrete steps to end the violence. In particular, it was necessary to immediately withdraw Israeli forces, to unblock the Palestinian territories and to establish control under the auspices of Palestinian forces. Both sides should respect the sanctity of religious holy sites and guarantee their safety. It was also imperative to conduct consultations with a view to coming to an agreement on a mechanism for further negotiations. Turning to the situation in Afghanistan, he said his delegation could not but agree with the conclusions of the Special Rapporteur on the region, that the perpetrators of such crimes as summary executions and systematic tortures should be brought to justice. He went on to say that even as Russia underwent “democratic renovation”, it could not be indifferent to the situation of its compatriots. The humanitarian situation in Latvia and Estonia remained a cause for concern. He believed that the passivity with which the United Nations and agencies such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) treated the situation in the region had been a signal of encouragement for the authorities to increase discrimination against Russian-speaking populations and inflame anti-Russian hysteria.

On the situation in his own region, he said that Russia had met the challenge launched against it by the vanguard of international terrorism and extremism. The military phase of the anti-terrorist operation in the Chechen Republic was over, and the political processes toward settlement had begun. Step by step, normal life was returning to the Republic. The work to uncover human rights violations there was also continuing. The Commission of the State Duma on normalization of social, political and economic situations in the Chechen Republic had made a considerable contribution to the coordination of efforts of the public and the State to respect human rights in that region. Against such a background of openness and readiness to initiate constructive dialogue, he was discouraged by “political speculations” surrounding the Chechen issue. There appeared to be a desire to teach Russia about morality. While his delegation supported cooperation, as well as constructive advice and recommendations, it rejected interference in its internal affairs. He welcomed objective analysis of the situation in the Chechen Republic, but would stand against justifications for terrorism, slave trade and hostage-taking. As the President of Russia had stated: a final situation to the Chechen problem could only come through the political process.

SOMAIA BARGHOUTI, observer of Palestine, said the question of the Palestinian people's human rights was within the mandate of the Special Political and Decolonization Committee, but the seriousness of the situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, warranted the airing of concerns within the Third Committee.

The situation in the occupied territories had deteriorated to the point where the peace and stability of the entire Middle East region as a whole was threatened, she continued. The occupying Power continued to violate the Palestinian people's rights in a gross, systematic and widespread way, primarily to create illegal realities on the ground as a way to break the Palestinian people's determination to realize their inalienable rights –- and in particular the right to establish their independent State with Jerusalem as its capital. Since 28 September, Israel had used excessive force against Palestinian civilians, killing more than 160 and injuring more than 3,500. It had shut down international crossing points, preventing Palestinian people and goods from entering or leaving the territory. The right to freedom of worship had been denied, and Amnesty International had labeled the situation as "clearly an acceleration of the violation of human rights so flagrant it could be considered a war crime".

She recalled that a special session of the Commission on Human Rights had been convened on 17 October, ending in a condemnation of the provocative visit by Likud Party leader Ariel Sharon which had triggered the tragic events that followed, including the disproportionate use of force by Israel. The international community must protect the Palestinian civilians in the occupied territory.

Saying she welcomed the forthcoming visit of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and appreciated the report by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, she said she regretted Israel's refusal to meet with the Special Rapporteur. She called for an immediate withdrawal of Israel's security forces from the territory to reduce the tension and the instability they generated.

AMARE TEKLE (Eritrea) said the situation in his area was worse than it had been two years ago in which he had pointed out Ethiopia’s treatment not only of people of Eritrean origin living in Ethiopia, but also Ethiopians in Eritrea and in the Eritrean territories which had now been occupied for two years. A Cessation of Hostilities Agreement had been signed, yet Ethiopia persisted in systematic and barbaric violations of human rights, particularly in the occupied territories. He listed actions to back up his allegation, including indiscriminate attacks on civilian targets, the rape of under-aged and elderly women, the destruction of farmlands and transfer of livestock to the Tigray, the destruction of hospitals and mosques, and ethnic cleansing.

The vast array of instruments to protect and promote rights was a triumph for humanity, he said. Yet those achievements were offset by demonstrations of humankind's cruelty against itself. Many who had been first to sign the major human rights conventions were contemptuously flouting them and promoting the culture of impunity. Ethiopia was among those countries. While some had protested Ethiopia's early actions, the absence of an effective international response had allowed the perpetration of gross violations with impunity. Many had refrained from openly condemning the atrocities in the name of "quiet diplomacy" or because of ”statutory constraints", as the inter- and non- governmental organizations called them. But promotion and protection of human rights were international concerns that demanded certain responses.

First, he said the international community must not only respect the provisions of human rights instruments but must ensure they were respected by others. Second, all violations must be condemned, regardless of who committed the action and against whom it was committed. Finally, political issues such as alliances and extra-rights considerations must not overshadow decisions on rights, particularly if the peripheral concern was based on incentives such as the greed associated with arms sales.

There was more than ample evidence for the crass violations of human rights by Ethiopia, he concluded. The absence of reciprocal action by Eritrea should also be noted. Eritrea had requested an investigation to determine the nature and extent of violations. The international community must prevail on Ethiopia to accept such an inspection.

SOTIRIOS ZACKHEOS (Cyprus) said that a major issue dominating discussions on human rights was the question of impunity. If the international community did not effectively address that issue -- holding State and non-State actors responsible for their actions -- it would continue to witness large-scale violations of human rights into the foreseeable future. Cyprus supported the early establishment of the International Criminal Court, which would, hopefully, deal with that question in a decisive way. He also pointed out that in its search to find solutions to conflict, the United Nations should always be guided by the need to safeguard human rights and fundamental freedoms. Solutions based on ephemeral considerations and the practice of “real politics”, which often worked against the interest of small States, would only lead to a sense of injustice and therefore fail to secure a durable peace.

He went on to say that the continuing human rights violations in Cyprus, stemming from the Turkish invasion and subsequent occupation of 37 per cent of its territory, were well known to the United Nations and the wider international community. The human rights situation was one of the core issues being discussed in the current round of proximity talks in Geneva. The President of Cyprus had expressed the determination to reach a viable solution that would safeguard the human rights of all Cypriots without discrimination. While Cyprus would pursue a solution within the framework of the relevant Security Council resolutions, it would reject any attempt to segregate the people of Cyprus along ethnic lines –- as Turkish officials had posited in a proposal for a confederation of two States and recognition of so-called realities. Those “realities” were nothing more than the consequences of illegal acts that had gone unpunished, he said. The unlawful partition of his country through the use of force and sustained by military strength was in violation of every norm of international law. Indeed, for 25 years, Turkey had thwarted every attempt to secure a just and viable solution to the problem, despite the efforts of the United Nations community.

He summarized for the Committee the human rights violations the Cypriot people were suffering, including the situation with refugees and displaced persons and their property, as well as the “drama” faced by the relatives of missing persons. He pointed out that reports by the Council of Europe had found Turkey guilty of “gross and continuous violations of human rights” in Cyprus. Also of particular concern were the violations of the fundamental rights of the Greek and Maronite Cypriots living in Turkish-occupied territory. The daily life of those persons could be characterized by a multitude of adverse circumstances, including restricted movement, absence of educational opportunities and an insufficient number of religious leaders. He sincerely hoped that today would be the last time his delegation would be compelled to report continuing violations of human rights in Cyprus. He looked forward to a successful conclusion of the current efforts by the United Nations to secure a solution to the problem that would lead to a reunited Cyprus, where the protection and promotion of human rights would constitute his country’s most- cherished principles.

ERIKA-IRENE DAES (Greece) recalled the statement earlier in the debate in which France, speaking on behalf of the European Union, had commented on human rights situations around the globe. Greece supported that statement, but felt the need to draw the Committee’s attention to the persistence of grave violations of human rights in Cyprus. The people there were being subjected to severe limitations of their rights. Some of those limitations included restricted movement, restricted health-care options and restricted acquisition of property. Almost 1,500 Greek Cypriots and Greeks were missing as a result of the Turkish invasion and continued occupation. That could not merely be written off as irresponsible behaviour, she said; it was in fact a grave violation of human rights. The United Nations had established the Commission on Missing Persons in Cyprus (CMPC) to look into the issue. While the CMPC’s efforts had been admirable, negotiations had unfortunately, broken down when one of its members died in January. She urged the Secretary-General to appoint a replacement as soon as possible, so that that the work could continue.

She went on to say that for the last 25 years the Committee had been confronted with the issue of human rights violations in Cyprus, and by now it should be obvious that those violations challenged the very credibility of the United Nations. Solving the problem of Cyprus was vital to the peace and security of the region, as well as the wider international community. It was important that a viable solution be reached within the framework of relevant Security Council resolutions. Though this tragedy had persisted for 25 years, time factors were of little concern in matters of human rights. The international community should condemn violations of human rights whenever and wherever they occurred, and that all Members of the United Nations family should enjoy the protection of their human rights under one roof.

OKSANA BOYKO (Ukraine) said that unfortunately, despite progress in the development of a worldwide system of human rights protection, the situation of human rights remained one of the main concerns of the world community. Strengthening and improving international monitoring of human rights violations was particularly imperative today. The use of force could not be considered an acceptable means of ensuring respect for human rights. The protection of the human rights of minorities was a most important factor for preserving peace and stability.

Protecting and promoting the enjoyment of human rights depended primarily on national and local efforts. She underlined the necessity of a more structured relationship between the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) and organizations with knowledge and expertise of the region in question. The existing cooperation between the UNHCHR, the Council of Europe and the OSCE in different areas was very useful. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were dispensable actors in the field of promoting and protecting human rights. Priority attention should be paid to human rights education.

SEYEDHOSSEIN REZVANI (Iran) said that the immediate disturbing point was whether the consideration of the situation of human rights in Iran was the result of a participatory, comprehensive process of decision-making or a biased exercise pursued for the sake of ulterior objectives. As reiterated during the previous session of the Committee, the situation of human rights in Iran now warranted a new, innovative and constructive approach by the international community, an approach based on cooperation and mutual encouragement.

Progress had been achieved in the field of human rights in Iran, he said. The newly-elected sixth Majlis continued to take reform-oriented legislative initiatives. Such reforms included a bill raising the minimum age of marriage, as well as further bills that would provide for the reduction of the maximum hours of work for women, and the establishment of a women’s right of divorce in cases involving insolvency of the spouse. Although the widely anticipated overhaul of the judiciary had yet to be initiated, there had been several positive developments in the sphere of juvenile justice. The first was a decision to establish separate juvenile courts and the second was to prohibit sentencing persons under the age of 18 to death.

The current political momentum of the reform programmes in Iran was institutionalized and irreversible. It was a process rooted in the will of the people. The administration of President Khatami was determined to promote an environment in which the nation would evolve to enjoy greater freedom. Under those circumstances, any initiative by the European Union on the question of human rights must be conducive and encouraging and provide incentives to consolidate the ongoing reform programme in Iran. A constructive approach to the issue required close cooperation.

BRUNO RODRIGUEZ PARILLA (Cuba) began by listing violations of human rights in countries that had criticized others in that regard. Among the problems he noted in the United States were racial targeting, lack of equality for women and inaccessibility of health care. He said the European Union had listed problems in 48 countries, forgetting to mention that almost all were former colonies, with current problems and conflicts originating in the violence of conquest, the plunder of resources and the imposition of absurd borders. Further in the cultured Europe that had forgotten the Holocaust enough to allow neo-Nazi parties to spring up, walls were built to isolate ethnic minorities who did not fit in. In Australia, where over 100,000 indigenous children were kidnapped and given to white families, discrimination and segregation of the indigenous population continued. Canada, meanwhile, continued to deny the rights of the indigenous people it had nearly exterminated while instituting restrictive and discriminatory migration policies.

Obviously, he said, freedom and democracy were not the exclusive property of the countries of the North, nor had they been granted the power to determine the political and social organization of other countries. Further, the model they tried to impose on the South was seriously questioned by people in the developed countries themselves. In the United States, land of soft moneys and financial contributions by special interests, one-third of those registered did not cast a vote. Ultimately, there would be no world progress if the right to development could not be exercised by everyone. Similarly, there would be no progress if the North did not replace its arrogance and racist disdain towards the South with respect for its commitments, not out of generosity but out of historical responsibility.

In addition, he said, the United States had provided false information about its alleged humanitarian aid to Cuba during its statement to the Committee yesterday. Rather than $1 billion, the total aid received by NGOs, private entities, religious organizations and individuals in 1999 had amounted to just over $4 million. The total amount for the last eight years was $33 million. There had been no licencing, no sale of medicines to Cuba by the United States. In addition, the new Appropriations for Agriculture Act of the United States codified for the first time the prohibition against American citizens traveling to Cuba. Another measure authorized the United States to use Cuban funds from frozen accounts in American banks to indemnify those filing lawsuits against Cuba, directly enticing terrorism against Cuba. With that law, the embargo stayed in place while the United States committed a genocidal crime against the Cuban people.

ALFREDO SFEIR-YOUNIS, Special Representative of the Geneva Office of the World Bank, said the Bank had worked closely with the Independent Expert on the Right to Development with regard to issues related to his mandate. The expert's reports were obligatory reading for anyone wanting to become acquainted with the right to development. The Bank agreed with him on the need to eradicate poverty to enable exercise of the right to development, but the transition from the conceptual framework level to that of realizing the right was a major challenge. The Bank wanted to be a part of the process of deciding how that would be undertaken, he said.

The first step was to identify the most critical strategic policy questions with regard to elaborating the framework for a new development paradigm, he said. The Bank's approach was to make it more holistic, broader and more inclusive than in the past. With that approach, the paradigm moved beyond pure economic development and towards the comprehensive development framework, which was centred on country ownership -- in essence making the country the architect of its own future. The new communication technologies were an important component in that paradigm, because they disseminated information and empowered the poor.

Making specific points regarding the model the independent expert had described in his report, the World Bank representative moved to the issue of the rights of indigenous people, which he said was at the heart of sustainable development. To be sustainable, development had to meet not only the resource needs and limitations but also the cultural needs of human welfare and progress. Therefore, indigenous people's concerns must be built into the design and implementation of human development programmes, including into judicial reform programmes. Further, poverty among the indigenous could be eradicated through cooperation, particularly in light of the decision to establish the Permanent Forum.

Thus, he said, there were a number of subsequent steps with regard to poverty eradication and the paradigms on the right to development. The first need was to declare poverty eradication as a superior value at the policy level. Then, at the institutional level, a strong awareness and communication strategy must be implemented at all levels of decision-making. Next, the conceptual debate must continue with rigour to avoid the perception that conditionality and sanctions were being brought about. That had been the downfall of the debate on social principles during the preparatory process of the Social Summit. In addition, he said the right to development was an intractable concept. Failing to recognize it was counterproductive, dangerous and hid under the rug some key issues in the development of developing countries.

Finally, while it was not difficult to make the right to development a comprehensive issue, it was more difficult to make it holistic. That elusive facet of the right to development had been a major source of poverty, entailing such complex issues as the reempowerment of groups in society, participation at all levels of decision-making, inequalities beyond income disparities, access to global assets and governance.

Rights of Reply

The representative of Kyrgyzstan said that yesterday the representative of the United States had addressed the issue of the recent presidential elections in her country. She said the election had been an important event in Kyrgyzstan’s history. It had been characterized by a high level of participation and clearly revealed the democratization process and the strengthening of the role of civil society in political life. The elections were held in an atmosphere of openness and transparency, without limiting the rights of any of the six candidates. They also showed that democratic principles and values had deep roots in her country. She added that there had been 268 international observers watching the entire electoral process. Some mistakes had been identified, but they were not willful and should not be used as a basis of reproach. She assured the Committee that those mistakes were being thoroughly examined. She reiterated that the elections had proved that democracy was the universal character of Kyrgyz society.

The representative of Sri Lanka recalled the statement in which the representative of Canada had said that the Sri Lankan Government had failed to address human rights violations in that country. Where there was conflict, there would always be violation of human rights. But the Committee should be assured that those violations were being investigated and the perpetrators would be brought to justice. He noted however, that the insular nature of the conflict posed unique problems for a small country like Sri Lanka. For example, he recalled an address the Foreign Minister of Sri Lanka had read before the General Assembly in September. That statement highlighted the fact that guerrilla-style warfare and terrorist tactics being waged in Sri Lanka only exacerbated what was already a difficult situation. The Foreign Minister’s statement also noted that when armed groups attacked from within countries, it was the duty of the international community not to encourage the activity through the sale of arms or by offering the services of criminal networks.

The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said, regarding Canada’s assessment of the human rights situation in his country, that Member States should not use the United Nations as an arena for accusing other States of human rights violations. If that were to continue, legitimate human rights concerns could never be addressed properly. Canada should discard the principles of double standards and subjectivity when assessing human rights issues.

The representative of Estonia, in response to the statement by the Russian Federation, said that when addressing situations of human rights, objectivity was of the utmost importance. She went on to highlight positive views of the human rights situation in Estonia which had appeared in reports of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the High Commissioner of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). At the European regional meeting for the upcoming World Conference against racism, the High Commissioner for Human Rights had found that Estonia’s national programme to deal with racism was laudable. The other human rights policies in that country were found to be “pragmatic” and “forward looking”. She was particularly pleased by the amendments to Estonian language laws. Those observations spoke for themselves, and served to create an objective picture of the human rights situation in her country.

The representative of Latvia said that his country fully aligned itself with the human rights recommendations of the OSCE and other international organizations. Those recommendations had been applied to all minorities. The language laws and language resolutions had also been amended. Programmes for the integration of all persons into society had been recently approved by the Government.

The representative of Israel said that the observer of Palestine had uttered a host of “unfounded accusations”. If she was so concerned about human rights violations, what about those aimed at Israeli citizens? Just today, Israeli citizens had been the victims of a car bombing in Jerusalem. If Palestine was in favour of a peaceful solution, it was time to realize that the cycle of violence that country had initiated would lead only lead to further violence. Understanding, however, could lead to the negotiating table and the search for a viable, peaceful solution. The choice was Palestine’s. It had been reported that during the night, indeed, both Israel and Palestine had reached an understanding aimed at bringing about an end to the violence. He hoped that Palestine would not only agree to that understanding but accept its provisions. The world would be watching, he added.

The representative of Turkey said that the human rights situation in Cyprus was not new. He was not surprised that Greece continued to distort the facts with erroneous historical allegations. Once again, Greece had forgotten that the situation in Cyprus did not occur overnight. Greece must assume its own responsibility in the events that had led to the current state of affairs. It had actively participated in the destruction of the “partnership state”. He reminded the Committee that all Greek Cypriots and Maronites enjoyed the same living conditions as others. He also said that the Greek delegation persisted in using the situation of missing persons as a tool to paint Turkey in a negative light.

The representative of Pakistan responded to France’s statement, on behalf of the European Union, on the human rights situation in various countries around the world. Here was a set of countries, he said, that had the presumption to

comment on worldwide human rights concerns while conveniently ignoring its own substantial failings. The European Union had consistently distorted and magnified the perceived shortcomings of other countries to their own purposes. In that regard, the Union was an exact analogue of tabloid journalism. Perhaps those countries should pay attention to fires burning in their own houses and the skeletons in their own closets. He went on to quote a United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) report, which noted that the trafficking in and exploitation of women was a $7 billion business throughout Europe. As to the situation in Indian-occupied Kashmir, that was one of the grossest violations of human rights ever recorded. One only needed to glance at the shelf-load of reports by credible human rights organizations to see that. Apparently those reports had escaped the purview of the otherwise vigilant European Union. Or perhaps the Union chose the better part of valour and turned a blind eye to those violations because the country involved was attractive to the Union’s economic interests. What a remarkable commitment by the self-appointed champions of human rights, he said.

The representative of the Russian Federation said that the human rights situation in Latvia and Estonia could not be judged as satisfactory. In fact there was a flood of claims to various international human rights bodies on behalf of the Russian-speaking populations living in that region. How could the situation be judged satisfactory when Russians living there could not speak their own language or teach their children in that language? he asked. There were too many open issues to assume the problem had ended.

The representative of Palestine said that her delegation had repeatedly stated that it was indeed committed to the peace process. That process, however, should be based on international legitimacy and relevant United Nations resolutions that would ensure the independence and freedom of the Palestinian people. The representative had unfortunately concocted forced symmetry between occupied and occupier: he had attempted to equate violence through the use of guns and tanks with protests for human rights.

The representative of Cyprus said that the situation of the enclave in that country had been addressed as if it had not been the result of a policy of ethic cleansing. What exactly was it, then? he asked the representative of Turkey. He went on to ask several other questions: did Turkey not occupy 37 per cent of the Cypriot territory? had it not expelled one-third of the population? Those and other questions needed answers -- not misinformation.

The representative of Estonia said that the reply of the Russian Federation had left the strong implication that his information was sadly incomplete. She would be happy to provide updated information and she was certain that the representative of Latvia would be happy to do the same.

* *** *