AS THIRD COMMITTEE BEGINS DISCUSSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES, SPEAKERS STRESS NEED TO IMPROVE TREATY REPORTING SYSTEM

Fifty-ninth General Assembly

Third Committee

23^rd Meeting (AM)

AS THIRD COMMITTEE BEGINS DISCUSSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES,

SPEAKERS STRESS NEED TO IMPROVE TREATY REPORTING SYSTEM

European Union Highlights Importance of Protecting Human Rights Defenders

Stressing the need to improve further the human rights treaty bodies’ reporting system, several speakers complimented measures already taken and urged further innovations to streamline reporting obligations and reduce report backlogs, as the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) today began its general discussion of human rights.

Human rights treaty bodies played a vital role in the promotion and protection of human rights at the national level, noted Canada’s representative, on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand (CANZ).  Individual treaty bodies had considered ways to improve their methods of work, including through meeting simultaneously in chambers, and measures to enter into dialogue with non-reporting States had been taken.  Treaty bodies should concentrate their concluding remarks on concrete measures to be implemented by States, including by focusing technical and political support on practical improvements to the human rights situation on the ground.

The representative of Timor-Leste strongly affirmed that international human rights treaties were of strategic importance and that the process of treaty reporting should be welcomed as a dynamic opportunity for State parties to clarify their obligations under the treaties.  As the first country to use the new consolidated reporting system, Timor-Leste recognized the value of reporting in promoting dialogue at both the national and international levels and believed the new treaty reporting process would provide a welcome opportunity to further enhance that dialogue.

Liechtenstein’s representative agreed that the proper functioning of the Organization’s human rights machinery was essential and welcomed the emerging agreement among treaty bodies to stay in continuous dialogue for harmonization and streamlining of their working methods was welcomed.  However, his country favoured the creation of ad hoc task forces and the designation of country rapporteurs over the establishment of different chambers or parallel groups.  The use of the word “chamber” was also unfortunate, as it evoked “tribunal”, rather than emphasizing that dialogue should ensue after the presentation and consideration of reports.

Drawing attention to another challenge confronting the United Nations system, the representative of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the European Union, stressed that human rights defenders required protection.  The European Union urged the international community to be particularly attentive to human rights defenders during moments of vulnerability and urged all States to do their utmost to protect them, safeguard their rights and ensure them a safe working environment.  Every society should leave room for independence of mind and free debate on governmental policies and actions, he stressed; human rights defenders did not pose a threat; they served as the conscience of society.

The representative of Australia, addressing the Committee in his capacity as Chair of the sixtieth session of the Commission on Human Rights, said that, regardless of the debates and controversies surrounding the work of the Commission, it had arguably evolved into the premier forum to discuss human rights issues, not only in the United Nations system but in the world.  The Commission continued to have a formative role in shaping the international human rights agenda and contributing to the promotion and protection of human rights everywhere.

The Commission had adopted 88 resolutions, 25 decisions and 5 Chairpersons statements, he noted, and had created new thematic mandates on terrorism and human rights, trafficking in persons especially women and children, and impunity.  The annual session of the Commission had also been complemented by a growing programme of intersessional open-ended working groups.

Also addressing the Committee today were the representatives of the United States, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Republic of Korea, China, Sri Lanka and the United Republic of Tanzania.

At the top of the meeting, Bacre Waly Ndiaye, Director of the New York Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, introduced the reports submitted for the Committee’s consideration on human rights, including the Secretary-General’s reports on the effective implementation of international instruments on human rights (document A/59/308), the status of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (document A/59/310), the status of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (document A/59/306), and the status of the United Nations Voluntary Fund on Contemporary Forms of Slavery (document A/59/309).

He also introduced the reports the Human Rights Committee (document A/59/40), the sixteenth meeting of the chairpersons of the human rights treaty bodies (document A/59/254), the Committee against Torture (document A/59/44), and the report of the Committee on Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (document A/59/48).  The report on the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture (document A/59/353) would not be submitted to the Third Committee during its session.

The Third Committee will reconvene at 10 a.m. tomorrow, 26 October, to continue its consideration of issues related to human rights.

Background

Before the Third Committee are the following reports for consideration under items 105(a) entitled “Implementation of human rights instruments”, and 105(d) on the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action:

A note by the Secretary-General on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (document A/59/324) transmits the interim report by the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Theo van Boven.

A letter dated 11 May 2004 from the Permanent Representative of Uzbekistan to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General (document A/59/96) informs him of Uzbekistan’s adoption of an action plan to comply with the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

The report of the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (document A/59/48) contains information on organizational and other matters pertaining to the Committee.  The report also covers information on Committee meetings with States parties to the Convention, United Nations organs and departments, human rights treaty bodies and specialized agencies.

A note by the Secretary-General (document A/59/254) transmits the report of the Chairpersons of the human rights treaty bodies on their sixteenth meeting which was held in Geneva from 23 to 25 June 2004.  At that meeting, the chairpersons considered follow-up action to the recommendations of the fifteenth meeting and reviewed developments relating to the work of the treaty bodies.  They also considered draft guidelines on an expanded core document and treaty-specific targeted reports and harmonized guidelines on reporting under the international human rights treaties.

Among their conclusions, the chairpersons recommended that consideration be given to:  providing a forum for representatives of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) field presences to meet with treaty bodies; encouraging United Nations country teams to submit integrated country-specific input to the treaty bodies on the States with reports scheduled for consideration; developing modalities for non-governmental organizations’ participation in the work of the treaty bodies; and standardizing an approach to be taken when States parties submit last-minute requests for postponement or do not attend to present reports as scheduled.

The report of the Secretary-General on the Status of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (document A/59/306) notes that, as of 20 August 2004, the Convention had been ratified by 26 States.  The Convention, having entered into force on 1 July 2003 following receipt of the twentieth instrument of ratification on 14 March 2003, also held its First Meeting of States Parties to the Convention and elected Francisco Alba of Mexico, Jose Serrano Brillantes of the Philippines, Francisco Carrion Mena of Ecuador, Ana Elizabeth Cubias Medina of El Salvador, Ana Maria Dieguez of Guatemala, Ahmed Hassan el-Borai of Egypt, Abdelhamid el Jamri of Morocco, Arthur Shatto Gakwandi of Uganda, Prasad Kariyawasam of Sri Lanka and Azad Taghizade of Azerbaijan as members of the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.

A report of the Secretary-General on the Effective implementation of international instruments on human rights, including reporting obligations under international instruments on human rights (document A/59/308) focuses on the meetings of persons chairing the human rights treaty bodies and the second and third inter-committee meetings on the methods of work of treaty bodies relating to reporting.  It also references the continuing response of the human rights treaty bodies to the proposals of the Secretary-General on reporting under human rights treaty bodies in his “Agenda for Further Change” report.

The report of the Secretary-General on the Status of the United Nations Voluntary Trust Fund on Contemporary Forms of Slavery (document A/59/309) notes that of the approximately $727,000 necessary to fulfil all the applications for grants received in 2004, the Trust Fund had been able to recommend only about $180,700.  To be able to fulfil its mandate and satisfy the new applications envisaged for 2005, the Trust Fund would need new contributions amounting to at least $325,000 before its Board’s tenth session, which is scheduled for January 2005.

A report of the Secretary-General on the Status of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (document A/59/310) notes that, as of 15 July 2004, 136 States had ratified or acceded to the Convention, with an additional 12 States having signed it.  Additionally, 52 States parties to the Convention had made declarations recognizing the competence of the Committee against Torture to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State party claims that another State party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Convention (article 21), and the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of individuals subject to its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation of a State party of the Convention’s provisions (article 22).  Also, four States had made declarations only under article 21, and another four only under article 22. Finally, as of 15 July 2004, four States had ratified or acceded to the Convention’s Optional Protocol, with an additional 23 States having signed it.

A note by the Secretariat on the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture (document A/59/353) states that the Secretary-General was submitting an annual report to the General Assembly on the operations of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture.  A comprehensive report on the activities of the Fund would be submitted to the Assembly at its sixtieth session.

A letter dated 10 August 2004 from the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General (document A/59/225) transmits the text of a decision of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in connection with the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the so-called Hascu case.

A letter dated 21 September 2004 from the Permanent Representative of Cuba to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General (document A/59/371) concerns the reprieve granted to four Cuban-born international terrorists who had perpetrated countless acts of terrorism against the people of Cuba.

The annual report of the Human Rights Committee (document A/59/40) covers the period 1 August 2003 to 31 July 2004.

Documents A/59/425 and A/59/44 have not yet been issued.

Introduction of Reports on Human Rights

BACRE WALY NDIAYE, Director of the New York Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, introduced the reports submitted for the Committee’s consideration on human rights.  The annual report of the Human Rights Committee (document A/59/40), detailed that Committee’s work from 1 August 2003 to 31 July 2004, including its review of periodic reports submitted by 13 States parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its application of a new procedure concerning non-reporting States through its examination of two country situations in the absence of a report from the State party.

The report of the Secretary-General on the effective implementation of international instruments on human rights (A/59/308) referred to various reports submitted by the human rights treaty bodies, he said, while that report of the sixteenth meeting of the chairpersons of the human rights treaty bodies (document A/59/254) focused on continuing efforts to respond to the Secretary-General’s ideas for enhancing the work of the treaty bodies.  The latter report also contained recommendations to enhance further coordination among the committees through streamlining of reporting and follow-up procedures.

The Secretary-General’s report on the status of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (document A/59/310) indicated that 136 States had become party to the Convention, he noted, and that five States had ratified its Optional Protocol.  Since the issuance of the report, two additional States had ratified the Convention.  The annual report of the Committee against Torture (document A/59/44) included reports on its thirty-first and thirty-second sessions, during which it considered the reports of 14 States parties and took decisions on 25 individual complaints.

The Secretary-General’s report on the status of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (document A/59/306) noted the results of the first elections of Committee members and drew attention to activities undertaken by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, other parts of the United Nations system and the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants to encourage ratification or accession to the Convention.  The report of the Committee (document A/59/48) covered its first session, held from 1 to 5 March 2004, in Geneva.

He also drew attention to a note from the Secretary-General, which explained that the report on the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture (document A/59/353) would not be submitted to the Third Committee during its session, as the meeting of the Board of Trustees had been postponed.  The report of the Secretary-General on the status of the United Nations Voluntary Fund on Contemporary Forms of Slavery (document A/59/309) included information of the financial status and activities of the Fund.

Statements

MIKE SMITH (Australia),speaking in his capacity as Chairperson of the sixtieth session of the Commission on Human Rights, said that whatever debates and controversies that had surrounded the work of the Commission, it had arguably evolved into the premier forum to discuss human rights issues, not only in the United Nations system but in the world.  The Commission continued to have a formative role in shaping the international human rights agenda and contributing to the promotion and protection of human rights everywhere.

Briefing the Committee on the results of the sixtieth session of the Commission held in March and April this year, he said the Commission had adopted 88 resolutions, 25 decisions and 5 Chairpersons statements.  New thematic mandates had also been created, notably on terrorism and human rights, trafficking in persons especially women and children, and impunity.  He said terrorism posed real problems both for governments combating its perpetrators and civil libertarians.  Hopefully, the Independent Expert appointed would help to tease out the complex issues involved in the fight against this scourge.

The annual session of the Commission, he added, had been complemented by a growing programme of inter-sessional open-ended working groups, notably on a draft declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples; on a draft protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; on a draft instrument for the protection of all persons from enforced disappearances; on the right to development and on the effective implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.

MS. VERRIER-FRECHETTE (Canada), speaking on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand (CANZ), said the human rights treaty bodies played a vital role in the promotion and protection of human rights at the national level.  In recent times, all parties -– States, treaty bodies and the Secretariat –- had worked together for continued improvement of the human rights protection system.  Therefore, it was no longer entirely accurate to speak of supporting the “reform” of treaty bodies; all now supported a process of continuous improvement.  The Inter-Committee Meeting had proved a valuable forum to bring more consistency and coherence to the treaty body system, and its work was welcomed.

Individual treaty bodies had considered ways to improve their methods of work, she added, including through meeting simultaneously in chambers.  As it was imperative for reports to be considered in a timely manner, to ensure the effectiveness and integrity of the human rights system, these and other innovative ways to use existing resources more efficiently were welcomed.  The measures being adopted to enter into dialogue with non-reporting States were also welcomed, as it was important to find out why States did not comply with their obligations and to be proactive in addressing that disregard.  Additionally, she stressed, in their concluding remarks, the Committee must concentrate on concrete measures to be implemented by States, including by focusing technical and political support on practical improvements to the human rights situation on the ground.

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights continued to play a critical role, including through its examination of its working methods and introduction of steps to increase consistency across the system through the pooling of Secretariat resources.  The Office should also be commended for its recommendations regarding technical parameters for reports to the treaty bodies. Those parameters would assist States to prepare, and the treaty bodies to consider, reports in an efficient manner.  There was also scope for greater use of information technology by all stakeholders to reduce the cost and volume of documentation.

JANE HULL (United States) said the United States shared a strong and unwavering commitment to protecting human rights and fostering democracy and the rule of law worldwide.  Democracies were more likely to respect human rights, both at home and abroad, and the United States was committed to supporting countries’ transitions to democracy throughout the world.  The advent of democracy advanced freedom and empowered individuals and societies to reach their greatest potential.  She said the United States had been a strong supporter of, and participant in, the Community of Democracies, a unique forum of 100 democratic nations committed to spreading and strengthening democratic principles around the world.

She said freedom of religion was an inalienable right of all humankind. People around the world believed the freedom to worship to be a vital and indispensable right.  Nations that respected religious freedom rarely posed a security threat to their neighbours.  Nations that affirmed religious liberty also laid a cornerstone of democracy and the rule of law.  For those reasons, promoting religious freedom was not only an international ideal, it was a mutual interest of all freedom-loving state and people around the world.

MS. GUL-E-FARKHANDA, a Member of Parliament of Pakistan, said her country attached great importance to the promotion and protection of human rights in framing national policies to establish an edifice of responsible and accountable governance.  Pakistan’s Constitution conferred equal status and rights on all citizens, regardless of religion, sex, race, caste, colour or creed.  As a manifestation to the Government’s commitment, a human rights mass awareness and education project had been launched in 1999, comprising four components:  mass awareness-raising through the media, local training, curriculum development and the establishment of a human rights study centre at the NationalUniversity in Peshawar.

Pakistan had focused on promotion of civil and political rights to create a culture of respect for human rights, she said.  Participatory democracy through “devolution of power” had been implemented to ensure grass-roots participation in decision-making and to provide for gender mainstreaming in decision-making.  The Government had also devoted attention to ridding society of extremism and lawlessness.  The system of religious schools was being reformed, including through modernization of the curriculum.  A vibrant civil society was playing an increasingly greater role in the development process, and the freedom of the press and media had been recognized.

Religious affiliations other than Islam constituted 3.72 per cent of the total population of Pakistan, she noted.  The Government had established a National Commission for Minorities and had promulgated an ordinance to protect the communal properties of minority communities.  There were many misperceptions about the legal provisions of Pakistan’s Penal Laws related to religion, especially the Blasphemy Law, she added.  These laws were not specific to minorities, but could be applied to any person committing such offences, regardless of their religion. The provisions of such laws were in no way discriminatory, nor did they victimize any one community; however, the Government was taking steps to prevent their misuse.

JOAO FREITAS DE CAMARA (Timor-Leste) said that as a nation whose struggle for independence was predicated on core principles of human rights such as self-determination, Timor-Leste remained a staunch defender of human rights principles and the belief that all individuals regardless of race, religion, gender, national and ethnic identity, political belief or any other status were deserving of respect for their dignity.

He said his Government strongly affirmed the view of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights that international human rights treaties were of strategic importance, and the process of treaty reporting should be welcomed as a dynamic opportunity for State parties to clarify their obligations under the treaties to which they were party.  His Government recognized the value of reporting in promoting dialogue at both the national and international levels and considered the new treaty reporting process would provide a welcome opportunity to further enhance that dialogue.  He urged the Secretariat, the treaty bodies and Member States to continue their work to ensure effective reform of all facets of the reporting system.

He said his Government endorsed the recognition of State parties that the treaty bodies were the cornerstones of the human rights machinery.  It supported the emphasis placed by the sixteenth meeting of chairpersons on the important linkages between the work of the treaty bodies.  To that end, the Government of Timor-Leste had worked conscientiously with a range of United Nations entities and other bodies in the preliminary phase of work undertaken to develop the reports.

PIET DE KLERK (Netherlands), speaking on behalf of the European Union, stressed that human rights defenders required protection.  They continued to be targeted in their professional capacities; they had suffered from discrimination and harassment and had been arrested, held in detention and had their rights to life and mental and physical integrity violated.  Human rights defenders remained vulnerable to attack just after publicizing reports, articles, petitions and open letters critical of governments, when investigating human rights abuses, when travelling to conferences, seminars and workshops and in the run-up to and the aftermath of elections.  The European Union urged the international community to be particularly attentive during such moments of vulnerability; all States must do their utmost to protect all human rights defenders, to safeguard their rights and ensure them a safe working environment.

Every society should leave room for independence of mind and free debate on governmental policies and actions, he stressed.  All governments must recognize that criticism, based on universally-agreed human rights standards, was essential to viable and stable society.  Human rights defenders did not pose a threat; they served as the conscience of society.  Human rights defenders could also enhance support for themselves, including through ensuring the full accountability and transparency of their activities and by enlarging their constituencies.

Unfortunately, he noted, the rise of terrorism and anti-terrorist measures had negatively impacted the situation of human rights defenders.  All States must respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, the rule of law and humanitarian law when combating terrorism.  National security and counter-terrorism legislation and policies should not be misused to target human rights defenders or to hinder their work and safety.  The Council of the European Union had adopted Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders, which sought to support and strengthen ongoing efforts to promote and encourage respect for the right to defend human rights.  States could not protect and promote human rights without the critical voices of human rights defenders, he concluded.  Defending human rights defenders remained part and parcel of States’ obligation to protect and promote human rights.

FARHOD ARZIEV (Uzbekistan) said his Government had established close relations with all human rights bodies within the United Nations system and was party to all major human rights instruments.  The Parliament had ratified more than 60 human rights instruments and his Government was committed to fulfilling its efforts at political and democratic reform.  Uzbekistan had taken decisive steps to reform the judicial system aimed at ensuring democracy and human rights.

In its efforts to fully implement human rights instruments, he said Uzbekistan attached priority to developing non-governmental organizations.  It firmly believed that the promotion of dialogue between States and non-governmental organizations contributed to higher standards of human rights.  His Government wished to reiterate its commitment to open and fair dialogue on human rights issues and its commitment to fulfilling all its obligations to human rights instruments.  Uzbekistan stood ready to further develop cooperation with the United Nations bodies and concerned States and other international partners to promote human rights.

PIO SCHURTI (Liechtenstein) said his country had always been conscious of human rights as a cornerstone of the Organization.  Promotion and protection of human rights and the rule of law had always been a priority of Liechtenstein’s foreign policy, as full enjoyment of human rights also served as the foundation of sustainable development, conflict prevention and peace and security.  Thus, human rights must be at the core of all United Nations activities.

The proper functioning of the Organization’s human rights machinery was therefore essential, he noted.  The emerging agreement among treaty bodies to stay in continuous dialogue for harmonization and streamlining of their working methods was welcomed.  Further coordination would not only prevent duplication, but allow treaty bodies to focus on their specific mandates.  Furthermore, while Liechtenstein remained unconvinced about the Human Rights Committee’s choice to focus on one particular issue, its distribution of a list of issues well prior to the dialogue between the Committee and the State party had made for a more focused dialogue.

Considering that the reporting system was a process of dialogue, his country favoured the creation of ad hoc task forces and the designation of country rapporteurs over the establishment of different chambers or parallel groups, he said.  The establishment of chambers/parallel groups should be limited in duration until backlogs could be reduced.  Moreover, the use of the word “chamber” was unfortunate, as it evoked “tribunal”, rather than emphasizing that dialogue should ensue after the presentation and consideration of reports.

SHIN KAK-SOO (Repubic of Korea) said his Government was fully supportive of the idea of a common core document to be included in a State party’s reports to all treaty bodies, followed by a treaty specific document for submission to the relevant treaty body.  This should streamline the drafting process and minimize duplication among the different reports required for submission by a State party. His Government strongly encouraged the harmonization of work among the treaty bodies where necessary and possible, including harmonization of the reporting process.  He said his Government viewed seriously the problems of backlogs and non-reporting, as they combined to undermine the credibility of the treaty-body system and dissipated the resolve of states parties to implement their treaty obligations.

He added that his delegation supported the idea that common modalities for non-governmental (NGO) participation in the work of treaty bodies should be worked out.  Modalities created order and predictability, the lack of which could lead to unnecessary and unproductive confusion concerning NGO presence in the reporting process.  His Government valued NGO participation in the implementation of the human rights treaties at home and their positive contributions to the work of the treaty bodies.  It would benefit all to have a standard and transparent way for the NGOs to interact with the treaty bodies.

LA YIFAN (China) said his country had scrupulously fulfilled its treaty obligations to those human rights treaties to which it had become a State party. China had submitted its first report on implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; nine reports under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; six reports under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; three reports under the Convention against Torture; and two reports under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.  It was also preparing its first report on implementation of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, as well as its third and fourth combined report under the Convention against Torture.

The Government maintained effective dialogue and communication with human rights treaty bodies, he said.  Constructive interaction had developed with competent committees through question-and-answer sessions, treaty body experts and committee members had been invited to visit China on a number of occasions.  Since the return of Hong Kong and Macao to Chinese sovereignty, the Government had lent vigorous support to the governments of the two special administrative regions in their work in human rights protection and fulfilment of convention obligations, under the policy of “one China, two systems”.

His Government considered that international human rights instruments had played a positive role in promotion and protection of human rights, he affirmed, as had the United Nations human rights treaty bodies.  However, the current reporting system remained too complex, and the reporting burden too onerous.  Any proposed reform measure should meet the requirements of streamlining reporting and improving efficiency, so as to lighten the burden of preparing compliance reports, especially for developing countries.

MANEL ABEYSEKERA (Sri Lanka) said that Sri Lanka, as a democracy, had placed a high premium on the promotion and protection of human rights.  Sri Lanka was party to 17 international human rights instruments that included all seven major human rights conventions and treaties, which had been taken into account by the judiciary in interpreting domestic legislation.  The Government had taken administrative actions, imposing greater responsibility on the police and magistrates regarding their duties concerning the promotion and protection of human rights and the prevention of torture.  Additional detention facilities at the Terrorist Investigation Unit had been created to ease overcrowding.

She said that since the Ceasefire Agreement of 2002, there had been a dramatic drop in the number of reported cases of torture.  Search operations and arrests under the Prevention of Terrorism Act had been suspended, and arrests were being conducted under the due process of law in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code.

Turning to the situation of migrant workers and their families, she said Sri Lanka had adopted various measures to protect their human rights.  There were formal pre-departure training programmes and welfare programmes for the children of migrant workers.  Returning migrant workers had access to self-employment and housing loans at concessionary rates.  A subsidized housing project for migrant workers had also been initiated.  Her Government urged both sending and receiving countries to cooperate in granting migrant workers due facilities and protection without turning a blind eye by taking refuge behind legalities.  Sri Lanka urged migrant worker receiving countries in particular to be parties to the International Convention for the Protection of Migrant Workers.

JOYCE KAFANABO (United Republic of Tanzania) said her Government recognized the importance of adhering to the underlying principles of good governance, including respect for human rights and the rule of law.  Her country was a State party to the International Covenants on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and Civil and Political Rights, as well as the Conventions on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.  Ratification of the Convention against Torture was envisaged by 2005.

Reaffirming its commitment and determination to adhere to the human rights standards set out therein, and under the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, she said her country recognized that the system of periodic reporting remained the central element in monitoring full and effective national implementation of those standards.  Parties to such conventions must move beyond ratification, accession and domestication of international instruments, and take positive steps to create an institutional framework for implementation of standards.

To that end, her country had established an independent Commission on Human Rights and Good Governance, she said, which had been empowered to consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals related to violations of human rights.  The Commission could institute proceedings in Court, designed to terminate such violations or to redress the rights of the victims.  The Commission also had a mandate to promote ratification and accession to treaties on human rights, to harmonize national legislation with those treaties and to monitor compliance by the Government.  Her country had not fully complied with timely periodic reporting, she concluded, as it would have desired to do.  Yet, the commitment to international human rights instruments had not wavered; the Government had set out to enhance and strengthen national capacity in human rights reporting.

* *** *