COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ADDRESSED BY EXPERTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS, INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITIES

COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ADDRESSED BY EXPERTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS,

INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITIES

Minister for Human Rights of Côte d'Ivoire Delivers Address

(Reissued as received.)

GENEVA, 15 April (UN Information Service) -- The Commission on Human Rights heard the introduction of reports this afternoon by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders and by the Special Rapporteur on human rights and human responsibilities.

Hina Jilani, the Special Representative on human rights defenders, said she was increasingly worried by the rapid expansion of policy, legislation and procedures that restricted the work of such activists -- that in some instances, State authorities or the State-owned media associated the efforts of human defenders with terrorism or general support for terrorists, and the introduction of exceptions to the rule of law through special legislation on general security or anti-terrorism measures was seriously undermining the very norms which underlay the legitimacy of human rights activity.  Guatemala spoke in response to the report, as a visit of the Special Representative had been made to the country.

Miguel Alfonso Martinez, Special Rapporteur on human rights and human responsibilities, said visits to several countries had shown there was a lack of a clear definition of human responsibilities and duties, as well as of the role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs).  He contended that many of the human rights violations in the world were a direct result of a lack of a sense of individual duty and responsibility.

Thomas Hammarberg, member of the Board of Trustees of the Voluntary Fund for Technical Cooperation in the Field of Human Rights, introducing a report on the status of the Fund, said technical cooperation programmes supported the incorporation of international human rights standards into national laws, policies and practices; and supported the building of sustainable national capacities for implementing those standards.  Technical cooperation in human rights matters was also a strong tool for preventing conflicts and humanitarian crises, he said.

Victorine Wodie, Minister of Human Rights of Côte d'Ivoire, in an address, described national attempts at reconciliation following upheavals in 1999 and September 2002, and said that a Government of National Reconciliation was taking steps to bolster human rights protections and to ensure the safety and security of

citizens and of the 26 per cent of the country's inhabitants who were foreign nationals.

The Commission also continued debate under a cluster of remaining agenda items.  These covered the topics of specific groups and individuals; the report of the Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights; promotion and protection of human rights; effective functioning of human rights mechanisms; advisory services and technical cooperation in the field of human rights; and rationalization of the work of the Commission.

Contributing statements were Representatives of Sierra Leone, Senegal, Norway (in a national statement and also a statement on behalf of the Nordic countries), Ukraine, Mexico, Switzerland, Singapore, Egypt, El Salvador, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the International Labour Office, San Marino, the Order of Malta, Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), Romania, Turkey, Ecuador, Finland, Honduras, Morocco, and the Czech Republic.

The Commission will reconvene at 9 a.m. Wednesday, 16 April, for an extended meeting that will include voting on draft resolutions tabled under agenda items on the question of the violation of human rights anywhere in the world; and economic, social and cultural rights.

Address by Human Rights Minister of Côte d'Ivoire

VICTORINE WODIE, Minister of Human Rights of Côte d'Ivoire, said that after the forceful government change in her country in 1999, the country had been progressively recovering from its sufferings.  A reconciliation forum had been organized, uniting all the forces of the country.  The resolution adopted after the debate was in the process of being implemented, particularly the approval of a Constitution and the installation of a Government of National Conciliation.  However, in September 2002, without any justification, an armed group had attempted to oust a legitimate and legally elected Government which was recognized by the international community.  Foreign intervention in the affairs of the country was attributed to arms trafficking in the region, which had been indicated in Security Council resolution 1306 (2000)

The Government's policies had demonstrated that it attached great importance to human rights, Ms. Wodie said.  Côte d'Ivoire had ratified almost all the international instruments pertaining to human rights.  In addition, 22 articles of the Constitution were devoted to the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.  Other institutions had also been established to deal with the human rights promotion.  A ministerial Human Rights Department had been created, the first such body since the country achieved independence in 1960.

Respect and promotion of human rights was a process that would take time, Ms. Wodie said.  The country considered that the efforts of the Government were in clear contradiction with certain accusations directed against it concerning supposed xenophobic acts, exclusion, and particularly discrimination.  It was deplorable that despite all the efforts to integrate the foreign population in its jurisdiction, the country was treated as a “Xenophobic State”.  According to the 1998 census, there were more than 150 different nationalities in the country.  Out of 16 million inhabitants, 26 per cent were foreign nationals.  The level of foreigners in any other West African country was only around 2 per cent.  Since its independence, Côte d'Ivoire had never expelled any foreigner living on its soil, including the Burkinabes.

Ms. Wodie said that before the current conflict, respect for human rights had been increasing in the country.  Since the war in September 2002, the situation had worsened.  Because of that, the Government had preferred to settle the conflict through negotiations.  Since 13 March 2003, a Government of National Reconciliation had been in existence, composed of 41 ministers, including the members of the armed faction.  The Government and people of Côte d'Ivoire were engaged in the difficult process, but indispensable for national reconciliation and implementation of the agreements reached at Linas-Marcoussis (France) and Accra (Ghana).

Presentation of Report on Human Rights Defenders

HINA JILANI, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders, said she had sent over 230 communications to Governments of almost

50 countries regarding the situation of some 400 defenders, working individually or in groups and organizations for the promotion and protection of human rights.  She had received information from a variety of sources that had enabled her to discern a number of trends, which raised serious concern over the role, security and safety of human rights defenders.  Among these trends was the apparent strategy, adopted by some States, of restricting the environment in which human rights defenders operated; organizations were closed down on the slightest pretexts; sources of funding were cut off or inappropriately restricted; and efforts to register an organization with a human rights mandate were slowed by intentional bureaucracy. 

She was increasingly worried by the rapid expansion of policy, legislation and procedures that restricted the work of defenders.  In some instances, State authorities or the State-owned media associated the human rights activity of defenders with terrorism or general support for terrorists.  The introduction of exceptions to the rule of law through special legislation on general security, or terrorism in particular, was seriously undermining the very norms which underlay the legitimacy of human rights activity and made the protection of defenders an obligation.  The report reflected her continuing concern for the situation of defenders striving for the rights of the socially or politically marginalized, such as minorities, indigenous peoples and rural populations.  She was also concerned about the role and responsibilities of private-sector actors in influencing the situation of defenders.  Finally, amid her concerns, she noted that in many cases referred to her, less serious incidents that went unaddressed by the authorities were subsequently followed by grave human rights violations against defenders.

The Commission was informed about her visit to Guatemala.  She noted several positive measures adopted by the State for the improvement of the situation of human rights, and the Government had demonstrated its readiness to cooperate with human rights mechanisms for the better promotion and protection of human rights.  However, despite efforts, the situation of human rights defenders remained extremely grave.  Action against defenders had included killings, death threats, beatings, forced disappearances, sporadic short abductions and other forms of intimidation or harassment.  Two categories of defenders appeared to be the main targets – those involved in efforts to obtain the truth about past violations and those involved in the promotion of the economic, social and cultural rights of indigenous peoples. 

Response to Report by Concerned Country

JUAN ALFONSO FUENTES SORIA (Guatemala) said the report by the Special Representative on the situation of human rights defenders in Guatemala was much appreciated, as it integrated the structural and historical problem of the country, the armed conflict, and the signing of the peace agreements.  The report also recognized efforts made by the State to reverse the effects of the conflict and to implement the peace agreements, in particular the global agreement on human rights. The Special Representative and human rights organizations also recognized efforts made in the area of compensation.

Guatemala realized that it had to give priority to the use of land, access to justice, citizens' participation, reform of the education system, recognition of the spirituality and beliefs of indigenous populations, non-discrimination and the promotion of a culture of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.   Administration of justice and eradication of impunity were matters of concern for the State.  In order to enable it to fully implement the recommendations of the Special Representative, Guatemala called for the support of UN agencies and for financial support.

Interactive Dialogue on Human Rights Defenders

A representative of Greece, speaking on behalf of the European Union, asked if concrete measures were taken by Governments following the Special Rapporteur's recommendations on specific cases of human rights defenders.  It was a concern that many States had not even responded to inquiries sent by Ms Jilani.

A representative of Switzerland asked if the Special Rapporteur was willing to participate in the forthcoming International Conference on the Information Society to be held in Geneva in December 2003.  He said the Special Rapporteur should pay special attention on the activities of non-state actors vis-à-vis violations of the rights of human rights defenders.  The role of the media in forming public opinion should also be emphasized.

A representative of Norway asked about the number of communications sent by the Special Rapporteur to countries concerning alleged acts of violence against human rights defenders, and about what trends were apparent in those communications.

Responding, Ms. JILANI said there had been encouraging signs concerning her appeals and inquiries concerning cases of human defenders, and her recommendations.  Some countries had responded positively, as exemplified by Guatemala, which had announced the implementation of her recommendations following her mission to that country. 

Ms. Jilani said that, if invited, she would participate in the forthcoming World Conference on the Information Society.  As stressed by the Swiss delegation, the role of the media was significant in forming public opinion about human rights defenders.

The number of communications she had sent last year had increased over the previous year, Ms. Jilani said.  She had sent 230 communications concerning the cases of 400 human rights defenders in several countries.  She hoped to receive responses but had not received any so far.

Presentation of Report on Human Rights and Human Responsibilities

MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ, Special Rapporteur on human rights and human responsibilities, said he was submitting the final report on the topic to the Economic and Social Council.  Two documents had been important to his work.  The first was prepared by his former colleague and Special Rapporteur Erica-Irene A. Daes, and the second was the draft Declaration on Human Responsibilities.  In preparing the report, he had faced difficulties in knowing whether NGOs had received his questionnaire or not.

The Special Rapporteur stressed the importance of missions undertaken, including to Bhutan and Syria, which were described in the second part of the report.  The conclusions reached showed that the situation in these countries was the same as in many others -– a lack of a clear definition of human responsibilities and duties, as well as on the role of NGOs.  His recommendations were designed to highlight the linkage of rights and duties of individuals in the field of human rights.  Many of the human rights violations in the world were a direct result of a lack of individual duty and responsibility.  The Special Rapporteur aimed to provide States with assistance in defining and underscoring the important link between rights, duties and the responsibility of the individual for the protection and promotion of human rights.

Interactive Dialogue on Human Rights and Human Responsibilities

A representative of Cuba asked the Special Rapporteur whether he could give more information about the experience he had had in his field visits.  What differences did the Special Rapporteur note with respect to the information he received and the experiences he had acquired in his visits to countries of the South and those of the North?

A representative of Egypt commended the Special Rapporteur for his excellent report. Egypt noted that it was the developing countries which had first begun to speak about this important subject before the Commission.  Egypt also pointed out that it was one of the countries that had responded to the questionnaires sent by the Special Rapporteur.

A representative of Syria thanked the Special Rapporteur for his excellent and objective reports and the efforts he had made to advance human rights.  Syria hoped the report would be published in all languages of the United Nations.

A representative of Guatemala asked the Special Rapporteur whether he could elaborate on the refusal of certain States to discuss the responsibilities of individuals.  How could these difficulties be resolved?  What was the role of NGOs in the area of human responsibilities?

The Special Rapporteur said his experiences in the field and the possibility he had had of visiting countries of different religions and cultural habits had been valuable.  The Special Rapporteur enjoyed the cooperation of the countries he visited.  In countries of the South there was a conviction that rights and responsibilities were interrelated and were part of a whole.  In the countries of the North, the only emphasis was on the rights of the individual and very little was said about social responsibilities.  In his view, rights and duties were mutually complementary and strengthened each other.

Introduction of Report of Voluntary Fund for Technical Cooperation in Field of Human Rights

THOMAS HAMMARBERG, Member of the Board of Trustees of the Voluntary Fund for Technical Cooperation in the Field of Human Rights, said that at the request of Governments, the Office of the United NationsHigh Commissioner for Human Rights' technical cooperation programme sustained countries in their efforts to promote and protect human rights.  It did so by supporting the incorporation of international human rights standards into national laws, policies and practices; and by supporting the building of sustainable national capacities to implement those standards.  Strengthening national capacities was decisive for any progress in the promotion and protection of human rights.  At the same time, technical cooperation in the field of human rights was a strong tool for preventing conflicts and humanitarian crises.

Mr. Hammarberg said that the context in which the Board operated had changed significantly over the years.  As an example, when the Voluntary Fund for Technical Cooperation was established, the Office of the High Commissioner did not exist.  The external environment had also changed.  There were many more institutions and actors playing a role in human rights -– as evidenced by the report submitted to the Commission by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) –- and there were many more issues to be addressed.  It was time to take stock and rethink the Fund's role in today's new environment in the field of technical cooperation.  The global review of the Office of the High Commissioner's efforts to enhance its technical cooperation programme from a substantive and technical point of view was a valuable undertaking.  The Office of the High Commissioner's efforts had resulted in a substantial improvement of its capacity to implementing activities in the area of technical cooperation.

General Debate on Agenda Items on Specific Groups and Individuals; Report of the Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights; Promotion and Protection of Human Rights; Effective Functioning of Human Rights Mechanisms; Advisory Services and Technical Cooperation in the Field of Human Rights; and Rationalization of the Work of the Commission.

SYLVESTER ROWE (Sierra Leone) said that her delegation welcomed the decision to move consideration of the situation concerning Sierra Leone from item 9 to item 19 (advisory services and technical cooperation) of the Commission's agenda.  This was the right move.  In fact, taking into account the particular circumstances of Sierra Leone, it had no place under item 9.  Were it not for the rebel war, the situation of human rights in Sierra Leone would not even have been placed on the agenda of the Commission.  As a result of the brutal war inflicted on the people of Sierra Leone by RUF rebels and their international and regional diamond-smuggling and illegal arms-peddling cohorts, Sierra Leone had been confined to, figuratively speaking, the detention centre of the Commission -– item 9.  Sierra Leone would like to work with other delegations towards an early review of the criteria for placing States under item 9, including consideration of gross and systematic violations by States, and gross abuse by non-State entities, in particular rebel movements, that were not parties to any human rights instruments.

Moving from item 9 to item 19 must not be seen merely as recognition of the dramatic progress that had been made in the peace process in the country.  It must be seen as an awareness of the fact that this Commission should focus its attention on the challenges Sierra Leone faced.  It was not enough to espouse the principles of democracy and good governance.  The practice of democracy was expensive.  People must see the benefits of democracy in the form of food, medicine and a roof over their heads.  The world was interdependent.  Sierra Leone was convinced that international cooperation was the foundation on which one could build the confidence, the institutions, and the political will to implement human rights standards.  The Commission was asked to remember the following: Sierra Leone produced beautiful diamonds, but when a Sierra Leonean man wanted a diamond ring for his fiancée, he had to import it from abroad.

MEME BESSINE NIANG (Senegal) said the large volume of migratory flows was a source of concern for the international community.  Senegal would continue to work to bring about a realization of migrants rights and dignity.

Senegal was convinced that sustainable development was impossible without a viable system of governance. Senegal was, therefore, committed to strengthening good governance through modernization and reform of its public sector, separation of powers, effective participation of citizens in public affairs, promotion of transparency and democracy, improvement in the work of Parliament, better human resources management and decentralization, especially in rural areas.

PETTER WILLE (Norway), also speaking on behalf of Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Sweden, said the Nordic countries were very satisfied with the way the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on internally displaced persons (IDPs), Francis Deng, had been carrying out his challenging mandate and had made it into an institution that played a crucial and catalytic role in one of the most pressing, complex and sensitive issues facing the international community.  His systematic and thorough approach had given impressive results that augured well for a better future for the internally displaced.  The fact that there were as many IDPs as there were refugees made it easy to predict that the issue of internal displacement would be with the international community well into the future. The guiding principles of the Special Representative were definitely a success in terms of creating and promoting and an internationally accepted framework for protecting the rights of the internally displaced.  The four main pillars of Mr. Deng's work had turned out to be quite efficient towards that end. 

Regrettably, success was so far less evident when it came to implementing such commitments on the ground.  Although the primary responsibility for the protection and assistance of IDPs lay with their States, the Nordic countries were convinced that the international response could and should be improved.

MYKHAILO SKURATOVSKYI (Ukraine) said in view of the fact that practically not a single country was ethnically homogeneous, the issue of national minorities had a global character.  Protection of human rights, including rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, was the bedrock of peace and stability both in individual countries and internationally.  In Ukraine, national minorities made up 22.2 per cent of the total population, and the Government attached primary importance to their protection.  In order to establish adequate national institutional mechanisms for human rights protection, several measures had been adopted in recent years.  Among them were laws on refugees; national minorities; development and use of minority languages; rehabilitation and ensuring the right of persons belonging to national minorities who were formerly repressed and deported from the territory of Ukraine; granting asylum in Ukraine to people without citizenship; and immigration. 

Guaranteeing the rights of the peoples who had been deported from Ukraine under the Stalin regime was a priority area for the Government.   The intent was the creation of favorable conditions for the return of the deported people and assurance of their rights.  In this connection, the Government had adopted a National Programme for the Resettlement of Crimean Tatars.  Concerning agenda items 17 and 18, Ukraine stressed that developing and strengthening national capacities was decisive for any progress in human rights.

DULCE MARIA VALLE ALVAREZ (Mexico) recalled that the International Convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and their families would enter into force on 1 July.   Among the main purposes of the Convention was to guarantee the protection of the human rights of all migrant workers regardless of their status and their location.  Another objective of the Convention was the adoption of measures to eliminate undocumented migration in countries of origin, transit and destination, and to promote programmes for migratory workers.

The duty of a country to protect its population against terrorist attacks was not a valid argument for derogation from its human rights obligations.  Impunity was a widespread problem throughout the world.  At the national level, Mexico was making efforts to combat and eliminate impunity. The present administration was addressing past human rights violations and seeking to bring perpetrators to justice.

JEAN-DANIEL VIGNY (Switzerland) said respect for human rights defenders was hardly a universally accepted norm.  In certain countries, the enormity of the violations of their rights implied that the State had an interest in silencing all opposition or criticism.  Switzerland was deeply concerned at the situations described by the Special Representative in Zimbabwe, Myanmar, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Colombia, Cuba, Belarus and Haiti.

 The administration of capital punishment could serve no purpose in countries governed by the rule of law and respect for human rights.  In this context, Switzerland called on all countries to ensure that this barbarous and inhuman punishment, particularly for crimes committed below the age of 18 years, end immediately.  Switzerland also used this opportunity to announce its intention of proposing its candidacy for a member seat in the Commission for the period 2007 to 2009. 

VANU GOPALA MENON (Singapore) said the question of the death penalty was not a new one.  The issue before the Commission was not about the merits or demerits of the death penalty.  That was too complex to be resolved at any time in the near future. For every argument made in favour of abolishing the death penalty, there was an equally convincing counter-argument justifying its retention.

The real issue before the Commission was whether a group of countries had the right to insist that all countries should abolish the death penalty as an international norm.  Every State should have the right to choose its own political, economic, social and legal systems, without interference by others State.  A number of countries should not be allowed to dictate their viewpoint without taking into account the diverse cultural, social and religious sensitivities of other countries.

ROALD NAESS (Norway) said the United Nations had a fundamental role to play in implementing the Declaration of human rights defenders.  Norway also agreed with the Special Representative on the subject that her mandate would be strengthened if the different parts of the United Nations system would contribute further to implementing her recommendations within their scope of responsibilities.

Norway emphasized the importance of the mandate of the Special Representative on human rights defenders and called upon all States to support its renewal.

MOHAMED MOUNIR LOUTFY (Egypt) said item 20 had not been discussed enough, this year or last, due to time limitations.  There was a need to improve the working methods of the Commission.  There was a need to find a balance between civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights.  It was also necessary to provide documentation, especially reports by the Special Rapporteurs, six weeks before the Commission session began.  Resolutions must be negotiated at different times to allow small delegations to attend without leaving their seats empty in the Commission room.

The general debate also needed to be organized, particularly on items 12 and 13.  Non-governmental organizations must be encouraged to give joint statements to save time.  Most importantly, parallel events must be avoided to allow small delegations be part of consultations and to contribute to the important work of the Commission. 

MIGUEL ANGEL ALCAINE (El Salvador) said El Salvador appreciated the work done by the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants.  The International Convention on the Human Rights of Migrants and Members of Their Families would be an international instrument useful for the promotion and protection of the rights of all migrants in the world.  Its entry into force as of 1 July 2003 would be good news.  Its adoption would be of global interest in that field.

El Salvador had already ratified the Convention and would like to see all States approve it.  The Convention would recognize the responsibilities and give attention to the situation migrants in general. The Government was committed to the rights of all migrants and would continue to adopt measures in that regard.  The provisions of the Convention should be effectively implemented by States parties. 

OLIVIER COUTAU, of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said that with regard to responsibility for meeting the protection and assistance needs of displaced persons, there was a tendency to immediately turn to international relief organizations.  While they did have an important role to play, it must not be forgotten that the primary responsibility for meeting the needs of displaced

persons lay with the State in which the civilians found themselves.  In situations of occupation, the occupying Power had primary responsibility for meeting the protection and material needs of the entirety of the population of the territories occupied.  In situations where the national authorities of the occupying powers were unable or unwilling to meet their obligations to protect and assist displaced persons, then relief action by humanitarian organizations could be envisaged.

The ICRC was alarmed that the extraordinary recent advances in the field of biotechnology, many of which had great potential for misuse for hostile purposes, had not been subject to adequate controls and oversight at the national and international levels.

JOOST KOOLJIMANS, of the International Labour Office, said migration policy and practice could only be viable and effective when based on a firm foundation of legal norms, and thus operating under the rule of law.  Extending rights-based policy and administration to cover all migrants was today more important than ever.  Under contemporary globalization, international labor mobility had increased, while levels of legal protection for migrant workers heightened their attractiveness for “maintaining competitiveness” because they were obliged to work in situations where decent work conditions were not enforced.  Irregular migrants were especially vulnerable because the threat of apprehension and deportation thwarted unionizing and increased exposure to dangerous conditions.

Several complementary elements were required for effective regulation of migration.  These included informed and transparent national labor migration admissions systems; enforcement of minimum national labour standards in all sectors of activity; a plan of action against discrimination and xenophobia; and institutional mechanisms for consultation and coordination.

EROS GASPERONI (San Marino) said the delegation totally rejected the practice of capital punishment, which was abhorrent and a denial of the most fundamental freedom of the human being: the right to life.  The commitment of his country in favour of the abolition of the death penalty had been reaffirmed during the recent Parliamentary decision on the ratification of Protocol 13 of  the European Convention on the Safeguard of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, relating to the abolition of capital punishment in all circumstances. 

San Marino would continue to make its voice heard on the subject in all international forums which worked in favour of the protection and promotion of human rights.

PIERRE YVES SIMONIN, of the Order of Malta, said the Order helped victims of conflict, displaced persons and refugees.  Its neutrality, impartiality and apolitical nature were of great advantage in cases of armed conflict.  In recent years, the Order had assisted displaced persons and refugees during massive exoduses.  The Order was currently assisting the Iraqi civilian population, which had already suffered from a dictatorial regime and 12 years of embargo.

The situation of the sick and wounded in Iraq was of serious concern.  It was essential that humanitarian organizations should have free access to victims and that they participate in the rehabilitation and reconstruction of the country.

MIRIAM MALUWA, of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), said UNAIDS worked with a broad range of partners -– governmental and non-governmental, business, scientific and legal –- to share knowledge, skills and best practice across boundaries.  Since UNAIDS' inception, human rights had been a crosscutting theme of its policies, programmes and activities.  A rights-based approach was central to effective prevention and care programmes, and for mitigating the impact of the epidemic.  The UNAIDS, in collaboration with the Office of the High Commissioner, had developed guidelines for advancing human rights in the context of HIV/AIDS, as well as worked with the United Nations human rights machinery to strengthen understanding, monitoring, and enforcement of HIV/AIDS related human rights.

The UNAIDS was committed to ensuring that the rights of people infected and affected by HIV/AIDS were respected, protected, and fulfilled, and that the impact of the epidemic was mitigated.  Human rights must be enjoyed by all, irrespective of health status.

MONICA PRESELECAN (Romania) said Romania had continued efforts at legislation and institution-building in an attempt to update the Romanian system for the protection of national minorities so that it complied with relevant international norms.  The Government body coordinating national minority policies was the Department for Interethnic Relations within the Ministry of Public Information.

One of the most important legislative accomplishments of the past year was the approval of the Government's Emergency Ordinance on the restitution of property confiscated or expropriated from religious communities.

YESIM KEBABCIOGLU (Turkey) said the issue of migrant workers was one of the most complex topics in the sphere of human rights.  It was an issue affecting millions of people living in the developed world for successive generations without the genuine protection of international or domestic legal instruments.

The primary issue which faced migrant workers was their legal status. Even after three generations, these people were legally foreigners in their respective countries of residence.  They routinely lacked equal opportunities in employment, education, health and housing.  For most of them, discrimination in the labour market resulted in poor housing, which in turn led to poor public education.  Poor public education led to inferior work and little pay, which completed the vicious cycle.

HERNAN ESCUDERO MARTINEZ (Ecuador) said that on 1 June, the International Convention on the rights of migrants would enter into force.  This meant that the year 2003 would be a landmark year for the human rights of migrants.  Ecuador trusted that in years to come, under the umbrella of this Convention and other human rights mechanisms, there would be a space for migrants in human rights legislation.  Ecuador encouraged States that had not yet done so to ratify this most important Convention.

Migration was an issue of global significance and affected countries of origin, transit and destination.  The report of the Special Rapporteur had highlighted important issues for the Commission and the human rights environment to focus on.  It was particularly important that the lack of documents and papers of migrants and asylum seekers did not lead to human rights violations against them.  Ecuador was trying its utmost to ensure all human rights of migrants.

HANNU KYROLAINEN (Finland) said the principle of non-discrimination lay at the heart of human rights. Everyone should be treated equally.  But unfortunately, minorities were still more likely to be subjected to human rights violations.  Minority rights were also among the key concerns of conflict prevention.  Minorities continued to be underrepresented in the political, economic and social life of many societies.

Those in the worst position were often women and girls belonging to minorities because they could face discrimination on multiple grounds.  The concept of multiple discrimination had been universally recognized for the first time at the Durban World Conference against Racism.  Multiple discrimination was a phenomenon that deserved major attention because of the increased intensity of the discrimination that it could cause.

GRACIBEL BU FIGUEROA (Honduras) said the role of the Special Rapporteur on migrant workers was pivotal for ensuring the rights of migrants.  Most people migrated to improve the well-being of their families.  Honduras had given priority to the issue of migrations and had set up programmes to facilitate the integration of nationals who returned to the country.  The migrant community of Honduras represented the second largest source of foreign income in the country, and contributed to national development and social stability.

For this reason, the strengthening of multilateral mechanisms in the field of migration was of great importance for Honduras.

JALILA HOUMMANE (Morocco) said since the dawn of history, migration had existed and often had existed harmoniously in the international community.  Migrants had participated in the construction of host countries and had contributed to their economies.  However, these days, xenophobia, racism and violence against migrants were on the rise.  The promotion and protection of the rights of migrants must be a priority for all countries, be they countries of origin, transit or destination.  It was essential that policies and legislation avoided a security focus when dealing with migrants, and that legislation and human rights mechanisms on migrants had a rights-based approach.

The Commission was also informed about the situation of Moroccan migrants abroad and initiatives undertaken by the International Organization for Migration. 

ALEXANDER SLABY (Czech Republic) said the country welcomed and supported efforts towards the preparation of a legally binding international instrument for the promotion and protection of the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities.

This would be one of the most significant contributions carried out so far to the benefit of persons with disabilities as it would increase their opportunities and ease their integration in society at large.  At international, regional and national levels, a number of instruments had been adopted on the protection of the rights of individuals from discrimination.  Key documents were the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and both International Covenants on human rights.

Corrigendum

In Press Release HR/CN/1032 of 14 April, the Right of Reply of Honduras on page 23 should read, as follows:

A representative of Honduras, speaking in right of reply, referred to the statement made by a non-governmental organization that had made allegations about the lack of investigations into the status of children in Honduras.  The information provided was unreal, since from 1998 to 2002 there had been 744 deaths of minors.  This information came from reliable sources.  The Government recognized its responsibility to investigate and clarify all cases related to this wave of violence.  The same non-governmental organization that had spoken had earlier congratulated the Government for its efforts in this area.

* *** *