COUNTRIES TELL COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS OF EFFORTS, CHALLENGES OF PROMOTING CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS

COUNTRIES TELL COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS OF EFFORTS,

CHALLENGES OF PROMOTING CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS

(Reissued as received.)

GENEVA, 8 April (UN Information Service) -- National delegations speaking before the Commission on Human Rights this afternoon described efforts to provide the full range of civil and political rights to their citizens, including through judicial reforms and steps to strengthen democracy, enhance freedom of the press, and guarantee freedom of expression.

Several Governments said press freedom was ensured within their borders at the same time as Government authorities chafed and struggled with the consequences.

A Representative of Gabon said the press was free, but certain media that seemed to confuse the news and information with distasteful scandal reporting had unfortunately threatened this freedom.

A Representative of Ukraine said the majority of media in the country were under the control of political parties -- each of four main opposition parties had its own newspaper and the daily circulation of each was about 500,000.  Regrettably, the Representative contended, these outlets functioned sometimes more as tools of struggle between different parties and certain financial groups than as independent sources of information.

A Representative of Sri Lanka said the challenge was to prevent tendentious and unsubstantiated news from becoming a tool for mischief-makers without having excessive legislative shackles on media freedom.

And a Representative of Zimbabwe said the country had been attacked for allegedly violating its citizens' right to freedom of expression -- and yet of the 13 newspapers published in the country, only three were Government owned, and the rest had made it their pastime to vilify the Government and its officials, which was indeed freedom of the press in operation.

Among other topics raised were human rights education, freedom of religion, the prevention of torture, and efforts to prevent arbitrary executions and enforced disappearances.

      Among those addressing the meeting were Representatives of Peru, Cuba, China, Ireland, India, Venezuela, Algeria, Poland, Republic of Korea, Viet Nam, Armenia, Costa Rica, United States, Libya, Mexico, Russian Federation,

Democratic Republic of the Congo, Greece (on behalf of the European Union), Norway, Egypt, Switzerland, Slovenia, Iraq, Georgia, El Salvador, the International Committee of the Red Cross, Tunisia, Romania, the Holy See, Colombia, and Eritrea.

India, Ghana and Pakistan spoke in exercise of the right of reply.

The Commission will reconvene at 9 a.m. Wednesday, 9 April, for an extended meeting.  A long list of non-governmental organizations is scheduled to speak on the state of civil and political rights around the world.

General Debate on Civil and Political Rights

JORGE VOTO-BERNALES (Peru) said important steps had been taken to guarantee fundamental freedoms.  Next July, the Peruvian Truth and Reconciliation Commission would produce its report on the years 1980 to 2000 and the violence that had occurred as a result of terrorism.  It was hoped that the results of this Commission would help to build a fairer society.  In this connection, the Government of Peru expressed gratitude for the valuable cooperation provided by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.  A national ruling had been made whereby the Government would bring its anti-terrorism measures into line with international standards.

Other steps had been taken to guarantee the independence of the judiciary.  This was a new phase of the Peruvian State and in its relationship with international human rights norms.  The Government had also invited the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture to visit.  It was stressed that the international community must support the Working Group developing a legally binding standard setting instrument on enforced disappearances.  This would be an important tool for the entire international community.  In conclusion, the Peruvian Government was working hard to consolidate and promote democracy and to strengthen democratic institutions.

RODOLFO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said the danger to the global establishment through force of arms of the hegemony of the United States-based most reactionary and aggressive circles of transnational capital was today a reality no people could escape from.  The implementation of this fundamentalist and neo-fascist ideology constituted the greatest challenge -- at short and medium term -- to the great achievements in the field of civil and political rights.  Using as a backdrop the feeling of solidarity expressed by the whole world to the
United States people in the wake of the 11 September criminal terrorist attacks, the ultraconservative and militarist sector which emerged in power in the
United States after the rigged electoral process had incorporated doctrines and concepts that violated and trampled on the most elementary principles and norms of international law.  The so-called doctrine of preemptive war unleashed with disastrous humanitarian consequences and at the expense of the most flagrant violations of human rights of a people victimized by superpower aggression, was the most illegal, immortal and dangerous conceptual fabrication of the plutocratic regime in Washington.

The rule of law, democracy and human rights were today subjected to the huge challenge of facing the Government of a superpower that wanted to impose its law and imperial designs on the world, in a Millennium that would thus be devoted to American "peace".  How was it possible that the United States and its allies, which had claimed to own a large number of resolutions adopted under item 11, did not include the request for the immediate abrogation of outrageous laws labeled as "anti-terrorist" in the drafts?  Why did they not do it if those laws excluded all the recourses to due process and had condemned hundreds of human beings to a total existential void in the twenty-first century?

SHEN YONGXIANG (China) said civil and political rights were an important component of fundamental human rights.  The realization of civil and political rights called for comprehensive engineering to balance such efforts with the simultaneous development of economic, social and cultural rights.  The cause of human rights could truly advance only if the two categories of human rights received equal attention.

Constrained by such factors as levels of development, the developing countries had their inadequacies in the realization of civil and political rights.  Blessed with better basic conditions, the developed countries nevertheless still had problems of this or that kind.  The Chinese Government hoped that each country could look at its own inadequacies in an objective way and recognize the efforts made by other countries in the promotion and protection of civil and political rights.  In this world, each country had its advantages and disadvantages.  There did not exist such thing as perfect.  Only though learning from each other to make up for each other’s deficiencies could all realize the full enjoyment of civil and political rights.

MARY WHELAN (Ireland) said the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers had devoted considerable attention over many years to the murders of two lawyers in Northern Ireland.  In May 2002, the British and Irish Governments had appointed a retired judge of the Canadian Supreme Court to undertake a thorough investigation of allegations of collusion in these and four other outstanding cases.

On the matter of freedom of religion, Ireland welcomed the report of the Special Rapporteur and emphasized the crucial importance of Governments cooperating fully with him in order to assist in the discharge of his mandate.  Religiously inspired cases of murder, assault, injury, desecration and destruction of religious sites and places of worship continued.  Ireland was seriously concerned at the threats posed to religious minorities as specific communities.  It was incumbent on Governments to ensure that the rights of all persons belonging to ethnic and religious minorities were fully protected and that members of these particularly vulnerable groups, such as those of the Baha’i faith, did not suffer violations of their rights.  Education had a central role to play in the promotion of tolerance.  Inter-religious dialogue must also contribute towards this goal.  This year, Ireland, as in previous years, would bring forward a draft resolution on the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance.  It was hoped that the measure would continue to enjoy the unanimous support of the Commission, as had been the case for many years.

MYKHAILO SKURATOVSKYI (Ukraine) said the country made great efforts to ensure that national legislation in the field of human rights was in conformity with relevant international human rights standards and principles.  Ukraine had ratified all six basic international human rights instruments.  The concept of the State policy of Ukraine in the sphere of human rights envisaged reforming the
law-enforcement bodies, establishing mechanisms within the legislation for observance and monitoring, strengthening national civil society, and improving legal education in society.  Ukraine was committed to further strengthening those of her institutions which guaranteed the rule of law and democracy, human rights and civil society. 

      Ukraine attached great importance to freedom of expression, unrestricted functioning of the mass media, and protection and security of journalists.
The information market in the country was still in the process of formation.  Regrettably, the institute of independent mass media was not yet functioning to its full extent.  The fact was that the majority of media in the country were under the control of political parties.  Today, each of four main opposition parties in the country had its own mass media; and the daily circulation of each of them was about 500,000.  Regrettably, mass media in Ukraine were functioning sometimes more as tools of struggle between different parties and certain financial groups than as independent sources of information for the citizenry.

HARDEEP SINGH PURI (India) said that more than anything else civil and political rights shaped a nation.  The framers of the Indian Constitution ensured that the human being remained at all time at the centre of the State’s concerns.  Democracy was an article of faith for over 1 billion Indians.

The world must not be indulgent towards authoritarian regimes, including military dictatorships hiding behind civilian surrogates.  Absence of democracy was an appalling violation of civil and political rights.  Sadly, there were countries that remained caught in a time warp.  They were unable to emerge from the fog of obscurantism.  Where others had moved ahead, they had moved back in time.  India had witnessed the horrific consequences of this in its own region, including in Afghanistan, under the able tutelage of its terrorist-sponsoring neighbour.  Democracies must rally against the international scourge of terrorism, and must treat States that sponsored terrorism as global pariahs.  It was a truly global threat -– one that no country should consider itself isolated from.

VICTOR RODRIGUEZ CEDENO (Venezuela) said the right to freedom of expression was enshrined in the Constitution of Venezuela.  The Constitution also considered that anybody exercising the right to freedom of expression was fully responsible for his or her statements.  The Government had endorsed the principle of freedom of expression and believed that full observance of this right was a prerequisite for the promotion and consolidation of democracy and a free society.

All Venezuelan citizens were protected by the Constitution and could hence exercise their right to expression.  In this connection, it was stressed that Venezuela believed in freedom of the press, but encouraged a responsible press.  The Government did not support actions on the part of the media reflecting terrorism.  The Government condemned terrorism in all its forms and believed in the international war against terrorism.  It was necessary, however, that all human rights be respected in the war against terrorism.  In conclusion, it was stressed that the Government of Venezuela had undertaken several initiatives to strengthen and promote democracy, since democracy was a prerequisite for the promotion and protection of human rights.

LAZHAR SOUALEM (Algeria) said the country was endeavouring to consolidate the rule of law.  It had exercised the irreversible option of strengthening democratic society, and had always made constructive efforts to comply with international instruments relating to human rights.  Algeria had always been supportive of the constructive approach of international instruments on human rights, and had endeavoured to cooperate with them; its regular cooperation with the mechanisms of the Commission and its engagement at a domestic level in a vast programme of political, economic, social and cultural reforms reflected that policy.  Among other things, reform had been undertaken that aimed at transparent management of public affairs and at good governance.   Judicial reforms aimed at strengthening the independence of the judiciary, which would guarantee effective justice.  Judicial reforms had also included establishment of a mechanism through which abuse of power could be prevented.  And they provided for justiciability of rights for citizens in order to avoid impunity. 

Through educational reform, new teaching methods had been introduced drawn from the most modern models, and aimed at elevating the schools into places for learning classical subjects and acquiring a culture of tolerance, dialogue, cooperation, and understanding.  An educational programme on human rights had been introduced to prepare citizens to apply the fundamentals of democracy in a society where a culture of human rights was already deeply rooted.  Tamazight, which was enshrined in the Constitution as a second national language, was widely taught, and those who spoke it were given with means for their linguistic and cultural development.

PRASAD KARIYAWASAM (Sri Lanka) said that among civil and political rights, freedom of opinion and expression and the independence of the judiciary were
two key standards that allowed an individual to enjoy all other human rights.
In times of conflict, freedom of expression and the attendant responsibilities of the media could become an early casualty.  The challenge was to prevent tendentious and unsubstantiated news from becoming a tool for mischief-makers without having excessive legislative shackles on media freedom. 

Sri Lanka was proud of its record in this regard.  The Government had already repealed its law on Criminal Defamation.  In the same spirit, the Government was now introducing a whole array of legislation that would ensure that the media had unfettered access to the workings of the Government. 

YOLANDE BIKE (Gabon) drew the attention of the Commission to the right to freedom of expression.  Freedom of expression was an appropriate barometer for measuring the degree to which a society was democratic.  People needed freedom of expression, and this freedom could be expressed through thought, words or art.
In Gabon, the Government had recognized the legitimate desire of its people to the right of freedom of expression and had recognized this right in its Constitution.

Gabon had read and followed the report of the Special Rapporteur on the freedom of expression and noted the recommendations made, particularly his wishes to collaborate with Governments in an atmosphere of openness.  Only if there was such communication between the Special Rapporteur and Governments could he verify allegations made in communications.  Gabon was a young country that was trying to establish a modern and friendly democracy.  In this regard, she referred to the National Council of Communication, which ensured the right of its people to audiovisual and written expression.  The press was free in Gabon; however, certain media that seemed to confuse the news and information with distasteful scandal reporting had unfortunately threatened this freedom.  This negative behavior discredited the noble profession that was journalism.

CHITSAKA CHIPAZIWA (Zimbabwe) said the British Government had embarked on a new and vicious campaign against Zimbabwe through fabricating reports of alleged widespread abuses of human rights, using the local opposition press and foreign correspondents in a last-ditch attempt to cause a change of Government in Zimbabwe as part of the United Kingdom's desperate bid to reverse the land-reform programme.  Combining the use of fabrication in the media with violence on the ground, such as that seen during the recent opposition-organized mass action, the intent was to provoke a situation that could be used to focus on alleged human rights violations and lack of good governance in the country.  These smear campaigns were intricately coordinated by British-funded non-governmental organizations, the opposition party and sectors of the local and international press.

      These attacks on Zimbabwe's land reform exercise and efforts to defend the white minority and their ownership of 80 per cent of the land in the country had led to the majority of developing countries lending their support to Zimbabwe.  The British strategy now was to create falsehoods about torture and rape in the hope of creating and orchestrating anger against Zimbabwe and its Government.  Zimbabwe had been attacked for allegedly violating its citizens' right to freedom of expression.  From such attacks, it would be difficult to tell that of the
13 newspapers published in the country, only three were Government owned.
The rest had made it their pastime to vilify the Government and its officials.  That was indeed freedom of the press in operation.

ROMAN KUZNIAR (Poland) said five qualities of democracy were protection of human rights; peace and security; economic development and higher living standards; justice and solidarity; and participation in and co-responsibility for the community.  Even considering the scale of internal and external threats to democracy -- economic and social collapse, corruption, eroding State structures, ethnic conflicts and war on organized crime -- the problem of terrorist organizations seemed to represent a particularly sinister type of antidemocratic virus.

Many problems occurred due to underdevelopment, corruption and mismanagement.  One could argue that, if the world really were the global village which the advocates of globalization had for years been claiming it to be, the more prosperous States would have never tolerated the lot of their less-privileged neighbours.  Under present circumstances, emphasis should be placed on the universal character of democracy and its relevant benefits for citizens irrespective of their civilizations and traditions.

JEONG-HYUN RYU (Republic of Korea) said there had been remarkable achievements in the field of human rights:  the Optional Protocol on Torture had been adopted, and the International Criminal Court had been established.  Efforts to draft a legally binding instrument regarding enforced disappearance were also being pursued.  All these tangible, concrete achievements testified to the fact that the common efforts of the international community to protect and promote human rights continued to bear fruit.

Respect for human rights was one of the essential elements of democracy, and human rights were inextricably intertwined with democracy.  Concerning the death penalty, although Korea did legally maintain the possibility of the death penalty as a form of punishment, it must be noted that it had not been administered since December 1997.  It was also stressed that domestically, anti-corruption had become a priority task of the Government.  It was evident that national Parliaments and local administrations had an important role to play in creating a supportive and safe environment that would contribute to the promotion and protection of human rights.  Over some years, the Government of the Republic of Korea had actively implemented various national measures, including the launching of a national
anti-corruption committee, to oversee and stem corrupt practices, particularly among public officials. 

NGO QUANG XUAN (Viet Nam) said civil and political rights, along with all fundamental rights and freedoms, were sacred.  Civil and political rights comprised one important part of the whole range of rights which were interdependent, indivisible and complementary.  The human being should be provided with favourable conditions in which to live with dignity and should be assured of opportunity to participate equally in every activity of social life.  Civil and political rights, just like other economic, social and cultural rights, were of equal value and should be realized on an equal footing.  While exerting efforts for the promotion of civil and political rights, every nation and the international community as a whole should give high priority to socio-economic development with a view to assuring a more deserving life with better conditions for all people.

Democracy at the grass-root levels had been given high attention by and was a prioritized policy of Viet Nam.  A Decree on democracy at grass-root levels issued in 1998 had in fact created a new democratic environment in the political life of the country.  Citizens were entitled to participate in social management, to discuss and to make contributions to the formulation of the policies, programmes and important laws of the State.  All democratic rights, the right to adhere or not adhere to a religion, the right to lodge complaints and the right to denunciation, equal rights between men and women, were guaranteed by law.

ZOHRAB MNATSAKANIAN (Armenia) said that over the past twelve years, Armenia’s experience of major transformation of the entire social, political and economic fabric of the country had been firmly entrenched in its commitment to the principle of interdependence between civil and political rights on the one hand, and economic, social and cultural rights on the other.

The effective application of the rule of law and fair administration of justice were vital conditions for the functioning of democracy.  Over the past few years, one of the most important steps undertaken by the Government was the establishment of the Commission on Constitutional Amendments.  The Commission’s task was to review and recommend amendments to the Constitution in order to further improve checks and balances between the three branches of Government, and to address inconsistencies between domestic law and international legal instruments to which Armenia was a party.  Since 1999, Armenia had achieved considerable judicial reforms.  In particular, a three-tier system of courts had been introduced, including Courts of First Instance, Courts of Appeal and Courts of Cassation.  Furthermore, a rigorous system of selection and appointment of judges had been adopted.

MANUEL A. GONZALEZ-SANZ (Costa Rica) noted the important achievements made in international human rights law and humanitarian law over the last few years and welcomed last year’s adoption of the Optional Protocol on Torture last year.
With the adoption of this Optional Protocol the international community had at its disposal a new generation of preventative international instruments based on transparency and the close cooperation of national human rights institutions with international instruments designed to protect and promote human rights.

Costa Rica expressed its gratitude to member States and civil society in this process.  All States were urged to consider ratification of the Protocol as a matter of urgency.  It was equally important to consider the practice of enforce disappearances –- a trend that was cropping up in many parts of the world.
Costa Rica therefore supported the drafting of a legally binding document on enforced disappearances, as well as the holding of a consultative meeting prior to the next meeting of the Working Group on this issue.  Costa Rica rejected terrorism in all its forms but felt obliged to appeal to States to ensure that anti-terrorism measures did not violate human rights.  In conclusion, Costa Rica appealed to the Nigerian Shari'a courts of Katsina to consider humanitarian principles of compassion and save the life of Amina Lawal.

JEANE J. KIRKPATRICK (United States) said the United States was a country of liberty and a country of hope; and it was also a country where all sorts of different people coming from every corner of the world more than got along.
The secret of the country's success did not lie in its geographical size, for there were countries that were larger; nor did the secret lie in the size of its natural resources, for other countries had more wealth beneath the ground than the United States did.  The secret lay, rather, in the country's commitment to freedom.  People were free to vote in the people they wanted to run the Government and then free to vote them out.  And they did it regularly -- without intimidation, corruption or manipulation.  The people of the United States were free to go to any house of worship they chose -- Catholic, Protestant, Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish or any one of the more than 2,000 religious groups of every perception that had found a home in the United States.

The United States was a democratic nation and it believed the only way forward, for it and for almost all peoples everywhere, almost all of the time, was along freedom's path.  Only with freedom could solutions to the multiple problems besetting the world be found.  Only with freedom could men and women develop their talents and find innovative solutions to their problems.  Freedom was the indispensable element that would enable individuals and societies to become more creative and productive.  That was why extending freedom around the world was central to America's mission.

KHLAED ABOU AISHA ALBUAISHI (Libya) said that in Libya, judges and lawyers must be impartial, independent and not under the influence of any authority.  Libya believed in the sanctity of the independence of the judiciary, and this principle was enshrined in its Constitution, which stipulated that judges must be independent, guided only by the law and their conscience.

Everyone in Libya had the right to a fair and impartial trial.  The right to seek redress was also guaranteed.  The law on judges established several guarantees, including the prohibition of the removal of judges.  Only the judicial authorities could review a court decision.  The court system included courts of first instance, courts of appeal and courts of cassation.  An independent Supreme Council was in charge of the appointment and promotion of judges.  The Supreme Court had a separate budget and account.

MARICLAIRE ACOSTA (Mexico) said the Government of Mexico was participating actively in the Commission because it was convinced that establishing international standards on human rights was tremendously important for the protection of human rights.  Mexico supported many initiatives of the Commission, including the drafting of a binding legal document on enforced disappearances.  Effective instruments and mechanisms of human rights were required to protect civilians’ human rights.  It was essential that these instruments and mechanisms also focus on preventing human rights violations.

Any violation of human rights must include due reparations and compensation; perpetrators must be punished; and the truth must be made known.  On the domestic level, the Government of Mexico was attempting to ensure that the judiciary was independent, with the support and assistance of non-governmental organizations and civil society.  The Government was also seeking to redress human rights violations of the past through a special public prosecutors’ office related to offenses committed in the past.  It was believed that this scrutiny of public society would contribute to the true protection and promotion of human rights.  Mexico would continue to give impetus to international initiatives aiming to strengthen international human rights standards.

SEREI KONDRATIEV (Russian Federation) said civil and political rights were part of the whole complex of rights.  Democracy was understood to be the only way through which all aspects of human rights could be implemented.  There had been attempts from some quarters to impose democratic values which applied to all.  However, attempts to introduce a uniform set of democratic values would disturb the good realization of the rights in each country.  The values deeply entrenched in certain societies could not easily be taken away.  Such values should be recognized as they were and should receive appropriate respect and value.

In Russia, the judicial system had been reformed to better serve the population.  A series of codes on criminal procedure had been introduced.  Following the reform introduced in the judicial system, a number of prisoners had been released and prison conditions had been improved.  The Russian Federation appreciated the work done by the different Special Rapporteurs with mandates related to civil and political rights.  The Commission should provide those Rapporteurs with additional resources so that they could fully discharge their mandates. 

ANTOINE MINDUA KESIA-MBE (Democratic Republic of the Congo) said the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) was committed to respect for human rights.  A general overview of the human rights situation had been recently undertaken and a number of resolutions had been adopted and applied with a view to addressing human rights concerns.  The DRC had ratified the Convention against Torture and there were no political prisoners or detained journalists in the country.  Freedom was the rule and detention the exception.

However, in the part of the country occupied by rebels, disappearances and summary or arbitrary executions were widespread.  The DRC called for the Commission and the Security Council to pay greater attention to human rights violations in the occupied territory and called for the establishment of an international criminal court to punish the perpetrators of crimes committed in the eastern part of the country.  It was also noted that despite the limited resources at its disposal, the Government was making all efforts to ensure the independence of the judiciary.

TASSOS KRIEKOUKIS (Greece), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said building on the relevant provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a series of international instruments had been adopted over the past 55 years for the protection and promotion of civil and political rights.  Nevertheless, violations of these rights remained widespread worldwide.  The European Union was particularly concerned and alarmed by the conclusion of several Special Rapporteurs that violations of civil and political rights were, in fact, on the rise.  Ratification of relevant international instruments was only a first step.  Effective implementation was essential.  Preventive action was also required.
It was importance to realize the role that monitoring mechanisms could play in this regard, especially through their various recommendations.  Human rights education also greatly contributed to the prevention of human rights violations.

Prevention further entailed action to deprive States of the means to perpetrate human rights violations.  The European Union welcomed the fact that a number of States had ratified the Convention against Torture since the last session of the Commission.  In this connection, the European Union stressed that all anti-terrorist measures must fully respect human rights.  The European Union was also concerned by reports that certain groups, such as journalists, human rights defenders, lawyers, students, trade union officials and judges, were increasingly becoming targets of death threats and the victims of extrajudicial killings.  Concern was expressed at the rise in religious extremism, affecting in particular minorities and women.  All Governments were called upon to ensure that their domestic legal systems provided effective guarantees for the exercise of freedom of religion and belief.  Many references had been made to the problem of impunity, and the European Union warmly welcomed the inauguration of the International Criminal Court, and believed that the Court would be an effective mechanism for combatting impunity and deterring the commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.  The European Union called upon all States that had not done so to ratify the Rome Statute.

SVERRE BERGH JOHANSEN (Norway) said that rule of law and the protection of human rights were inseparable concepts.  The rule of law was a precondition for the realization of human rights and the protection of human beings, regardless of ethnicity, gender, nationality, political conviction, religion or any other status.  To build, uphold and develop the rule of law and respect for human rights on a global scale was the daunting task taken on by the Commission.  Arbitrary detention, lack of independence of judges and lawyers, violations of freedom of opinion and expression, as well as torture, extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and involuntary disappearances, were all violations that struck at the very core of the rule of law.

The right to life was the most fundamental of all human rights.  Norway was therefore fundamentally opposed to the use of death penalty, a form of punishment that was totally incompatible with the notion of human dignity.  And no circumstances or overriding interests could justify torture.

REMA KHALIL (Egypt) said Egypt was convinced of the need to strengthen all human rights, since they were indivisible and could therefore not be separated.  Egypt’s policy was based on the need to respect these rights and to set up mechanisms to implement them.

As part of its development policy, Egypt had drafted several human rights programs, especially for those working in the administration of justice and in the media.  Egypt also had cooperated with United Nations Development Programme and had developed follow-up mechanisms to ensure compliance with the country's international human rights commitments.  It submitted periodic reports to the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture and had fruitful dialogues with these two bodies.  Egypt stressed that it had always cooperated with United Nations bodies, providing them with detailed responses to any requests forwarded.  It was essential to attach great importance to fighting torture.

JEAN-DANIEL VIGNY (Switzerland) said that in all countries, without exception, authorities must demonstrate their opposition to torture.  All attempts to legalize physical or psychological pressure during interrogations, for example in the war against terrorism, must be condemned in the strictest terms.  Switzerland joined other delegations in welcoming the work of the Working Group on a legally binding document on enforced disappearances aiming to protect all persons who were or had become the victims of enforced disappearance.  The best way to protect and promote their human rights would be the creation of an Optional Protocol on this issue to the Convention on Civil and Political Rights.

Switzerland also called upon the Governments of Algeria, Cameroon, India, Russian Federation, Pakistan, Israel, Sierra Leone, Uganda and Jamaica to cooperate with the Special Rapporteur on arbitrary executions and allow her to visit their respective countries.  The Governments of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Afghanistan were called upon to implement the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur, including by ensuring that there was no impunity for perpetrators of extrajudicial or arbitrary executions.

ALJAZ GOSNAR(Slovenia) said Slovenia had supported the adoption of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture last year in the General Assembly.  It also supported the substantive deliberations during the first session of the open-ended working group on elaboration of an international instrument for protection against enforced disappearances.  Slovenia warmly welcomed the activities of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and his Office in ensuring respect for human rights protection in the fight against terrorism.

Slovenia supported the commencement of a useful dialogue between the Counter-Terrorism Committee of the Security Council and human rights experts.
It also endorsed the project of the Office of the High Commissioner to assemble a digest of established international human rights standards in the fight against terrorism and called for its speedy publication.  Given the increased engagement of the Office in that respect, Slovenia called upon the High Commissioner to establish a focal point within his Office to coordinate relevant activities.

MOHAMMED SAHIB(Iraq) said the United States and Great Britain were committing serious violations of the human rights of the Iraq people, causing the death and injury to hundreds of civilians.  The war waged against Iraq, in violation of international law and the principle of sovereignty, was aimed at exploiting Iraqi oil.  The United States and Great Britain had been using depleted uranium and striking without discrimination.  The use of uranium had resulted in damage to the environment and the death of thousands.

The Commission was urged to shoulder its responsibility and condemn the genocide being committed against the people of Iraq.

ALEXANDER KAVASADZE(Georgia) said no one could give a serious statement in two and a half minutes.  The Georgian delegation had participated in the work of the open-ended working group established to elaborate a draft legally binding normative instrument for the protection of all persons from enforced disappearances and supported the idea of elaborating the text of the mentioned draft.

Georgia was a Christian country that had lived without any religious conflict for more than 15 centuries.  The community and the Christian Church were taking effective measures to ensure that acts of religious intolerance did not occur, including through a Presidential Decree that approved a plan of action for strengthening the human rights protection of minorities permanently residing in Georgia.  The Commission was informed that Georgia had invited the Special Rapporteurs on freedom of religion or belief and on the question of torture to visit the country.  Georgia held high hopes for their support and assistance.

MIGUEL ANGEL ALCAINE(El Salvador) said that 12 years after the peace accord had been signed in the country, the United Nations verification mission had terminated its work in El Salvador at the beginning of this year, and it had recognized the effective implementation of the peace treaty by the Government of El Salvador.

The country's President, Francisco Flores, had announced to the United Nations Secretary-General that "El Salvador was a transformed country capable of assuming fully the consolidation of peace, through the strengthening of its democratic institutions; and it was enhancing the culture of tolerance".
The Government of El Salvador had a vision of constructing a peaceful society and a modern State which would respect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of its citizens.

OLIVIER COUTAU, of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said the ICRC had held an international conference from 19 to 21 February on the issue of persons missing as the result of armed conflict or internal violence.  Probably for the first time, all the major parties had come together.  Families of missing persons, politicians, military personnel, human rights activists, forensic scientists and humanitarian organizations had participated.

While there were differences of opinion on the right of families to know the fate of their loved ones as laid down in international humanitarian law, the central point was recognition of the pain suffered by those facing the uncertainty that remained when a relative disappeared.  The conference adopted by consensus a set of observations and recommendations which was available to anyone interested.

HABIB MANSOUR(Tunisia) said the debate on civil and political rights provided the ideal opportunity to see how the respective communities of the Commission were adhering to civil and political human rights.  It was clear that Tunisia had opted for a democratic ideal.  It had opted for global, progressive and dynamic strategies, based on openness and transparency. 

The main guidelines in Tunisia aimed at building a new and modern society, with democracy as a foundation and with strong human rights and humanitarian principles.  Without enumerating all efforts of the President of Tunisia in modernizing the country, Tunisia explained that the modernization and democratization of society was based on strategies of economic prosperity, social peace and stability, promotion of political pluralism, institutional and judicial reform, and the promotion of the values of tolerance, solidarity and dialogue.

PETRU DUMITRIU (Romania) said Romania, Peru and other co-sponsors would submit a new resolution aimed at promoting and upholding democracy.  A special emphasis would be suggested on enhanced coherence within the United Nations system and a more active profile for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in promoting democracy and helping democratization processes to advance.  Similar recommendations would be addressed to the special procedures of the United Nations.  A more active and focused role would be invited from regional, subregional and other organizations and arrangements, as the best way to make the universal values and principles of democracy genuinely accepted and implemented in specific regional, cultural and societal contexts.

Romania believed that democracy should be recognized along with human rights as a universal aspiration with global reach and validity, and subject to increased normative efforts.

DIARMUID MARTIN(Holy See) said the primary responsibility for fostering dialogue between religions rested with religious leaders themselves.  Religious leaders had a special responsibility to strongly reaffirm that attempts to use religion as an excuse for violence or terrorism could not be reconciled with any true religious spirit.

There was no place in a culture of tolerance for gestures and declarations which showed disrespect for or were offensive to what was most sacred to the conscience of individual believers and their communities.  No one should remain a second-class citizen because of his religious belief.  Each religious community had the right to its own existence and to legal recognition which allowed it to operate fully in any country.

CAMILO REYES RODRIGUEZ(Colombia) said the principal objective of the democratic security policy being implemented by Colombia was to guarantee the rights and freedoms of all its citizens.  The policy of democratic security had called for solidarity on the part of the citizenry.  Those who criticized this policy failed to recognize the spirit behind it.

The immense backing of the Colombian population showed that this was indeed the right path.  It was the appropriate response to the arrogance, violence and destruction of illegal armed groups operating in Colombia.  Colombia stressed the need for the Commission to focus more attention on the effects of non-State actors on human rights, particularly in view of the spread of terrorism. 

AMARE TEKLE(Eritrea) said that until recently, there had been 14 religious groups in Eritrea.  The country was almost evenly divided between Christians and Muslims.  The Orthodox Church had existed since 900 A.D.  Islam had established itself not much later.  Catholicism was introduced about 1600 but took root in the late 18th century.  The Lutheran Church established itself in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.

The Special Rapporteur on religious intolerance had reported that there were Buddhist temples in the country, which was wrong.  Throughout the century, all those religious groups had lived in harmony.  Eritrea was a secular State and would remain a secular State.  All religions were equal and no religion was more equal than others.

Right of Reply

A Representative of India, speaking in right of reply, said that it seemed that 11 agenda items were not enough for Pakistan to express its obsession with India.  Military dictatorship was military dictatorship.  The delegates of Pakistan seemed to have spent a long time reading Indian writing.  India only wished Pakistani writers and media were allowed similar freedom without the fear of being silenced, jailed or worse.  Before the partition of India, Hindus had constituted about 30 per cent of the population of the area that was now Pakistan.  Today, Hindus constituted less than 2 per cent of the population.  In India, Muslims accounted for 8 per cent of the population at the time.  Today they constituted 15 per cent.  Since people voted with their feet, it should not be too difficult to see the verdict of minorities over the relative advantages of the
two countries.

A Representative of Ghana, referring to one of the Special Rapporteur’s reports, said there was an omission of Ghana’s reply in the section on communications.  In the addendum, the reply from the Government of Ghana was not included even though a reply had been sent.  The reply explained that the death threat allegations mentioned had been investigated and were before a competent court in Ghana.  The Government had protected the lives of those involved and the right to life was fully protected.  Ghana would be happy if the reply of the Government was circulated as an official document.

A Representative of Pakistan said the current Indian Government was not the exception to a fascist regime.  The Kashmiris' freedom was to be slain and summarily executed.  Only a fascist regime could allow such a situation.  India was attempting to mask what was taking place in Kashmir and Jammu.  Instead of accusing a country like Pakistan, which was fighting terrorism, India should look at its activities in Kashmir and Jammu, where the people's blood was being poured.

* *** *