Sixty-first General Assembly

Third Committee

34^th Meeting (AM)

INNOVATIVE APPROACHES NEEDED TO ADDRESS CHALLENGES FACING HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL,

THIRD COMMITTEE TOLD, AS CONCERNS ARE EXPRESSED ABOUT OVERLAP, DUPLICATION

Other Speakers Say Human Rights Issues Continue

To be Addressed in Selective, Politicized Manner

Innovative approaches were needed to deal with the challenges faced by the new Human Rights Council, the representative of Mexico told the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) today, as it continued its general discussion on human rights questions.

The Third Committee itself had to be revitalized, she said, in order to make it more efficient and to avoid unnecessary duplication with the work of the Council.

The representative of Guinea-Bissau also expressed concern about overlap and duplication between the work of the Third Committee and the Human Rights Council.  That important issue should be addressed within the framework of ongoing reforms of the United Nations human rights machinery, he said.  He also expressed regret that the Third Committee limited itself to mutual criticisms rather than promoting a universal view of human rights, and hoped the Committee would be inclined to have a more responsible dialogue.

The representative of Japan noted that while the establishment of the Human Rights Council represented a significant step forward, its performance so far had not met expectations.  He hoped that the Council would find a way to foster a new spirit of international cooperation and address grave violations of human rights with decisiveness, swiftness and flexibility.

Several representatives today said that human rights issues continued to be addressed in a selective and politicized manner.  The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, for instance, noted that the illegal “war against terrorism” pursued by the United States and the recent massacre of civilians in Lebanon perpetrated by Israel were barbarous acts which had utterly ignored international laws and human rights.  The Third Committee should be a model in denouncing such crimes against humanity, he said.  It was deplorable, however, that the Committee had been converted into a place of taking issue with developing countries and a scene for the arbitrariness and high-handedness of shameless criminals.

The representative of Iran continued in this vein, noting that no country could claim perfection in its human rights record.  The appalling situation in Guantanamo Bay, torture in Iraqi prisons, secret detention centres in Europe, and inhumane treatment of the Palestinian people by the Israeli regime were but a few examples of gross violations of human rights by the so called champions of human rights, he said.  He added that there had been a rise in discrimination on the basis of religion and ethnic origin in many Western countries, with Muslims and certain ethnic minorities subjected to verbal and physical attacks, and to discrimination in jobs and housing.

Canada had made efforts to address its own human rights record, that country’s representative said, stressing that societies could not heal without the recognition of wrongs.  He then focused the bulk of his remarks on human rights concerns in countries including Cuba, the Sudan, and Uzbekistan prompting a number of delegations to respond in exercise of the right of reply.

The representatives of the Republic of Moldova, the Philippines, New Zealand, Indonesia, Belarus, Bolivia, Georgia and Cameroon also spoke today on human rights questions.  The observer of Palestine also made a statement, as did a representative of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.

Speaking in exercise of the right of reply were the representatives of the Sudan, Cuba, Japan, Ethiopia and Uzbekistan.

In other business today, Uruguay’s representative introduced a draft resolution on the rights of the child, which focused particular attention on children and poverty and on a follow-up to the Secretary-General’s study on violence against children.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 1 November, to continue its discussion of human rights questions.

Background

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met today to continue its general discussion of human rights questions.

The Committee had before it the Secretary-General’s report on regional arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights (document A/61/513), which highlights regional strategies and significant developments concerning the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), which aims to mainstream human rights into the work of the United Nations and regional bodies and, thus, more effectively promote and protect human rights.  The report says the approach has proved particularly valuable for OHCHR in countries where it has no office.  In 2005 and 2006, the High Commissioner’s Office gave new impetus to its regional strategy in line with the Secretary-General’s report In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all (document A/59/2005), the High Commissioner’s plan of action (document A/59/2005/Add.3, annex) and the High Commissioner’s 2006-2007 strategic management plan.  The report concludes that OHCHR would continue to strengthen cooperation between the United Nations and regional bodies to close human rights protection gaps.

For more background information, please see Press Release GA/SHC/3863 of 27 October.

The Committee also was expected to hear the introduction of a draft resolution on the rights of the child (document A/C.3/61/L.16).

Introduction of Draft Resolution

The representative of Uruguay introduced a draft resolution on the rights of the child (document A/C.3/61/L.16), noting that the text included a special section on children and poverty and recommended follow-up to the special study on all forms of violence against children.  The lack of goods and services hampered childhood development in many ways, affecting their nutrition, health, education, participation and security.  More than 1 billion children suffered from a severe lack of one of the essential goods they needed to grow, she said.  The ways that children suffered extreme poverty were different from adults, and specific measures were needed to address the special needs of children.  The comprehensive study on violence against children confirmed that violence against children existed in all countries around the world.  Follow-up to that study should be undertaken at the international and national level, she said.

Statements

ALEXEI TULBURE ( Republic of Moldova) said his country had adopted a National Human Rights Action Plan for the period 2004-2008 to improve the legal framework, strengthen democratic institutions and increase public awareness.  However, the Government regretted that it could exercise control over all of its territory, notably the Transdnistrian region.  The ongoing imprisonment of two members of the so called “Ilascu Group” convicted in 1993 by an illegal court in Transdnistria had been a matter of great concern; the responsible authorities of the Russian Federation -- which supported the separatist regime -- had failed to implement a July 2004 ruling of the European Court of Human Rights calling for the pair’s immediate release.  Moldova called upon the international community to use all available means for the Court’s ruling to be fulfilled.

The very hard conditions in prisons in the Transdnistria region of the Republic of Moldova had been criticized for years by non-governmental organizations and international bodies, he said.  Conditions had not improved; torture and arbitrary detention had reportedly continued.  Religious freedom in the Transdnistrian region had been limited and the authorities controlled most of the media.  In March 2006, the Transdnistrian leader Igor Smirnow had issued a decree prohibiting non-governmental organizations from receiving international funding.  Non-governmental organizations had been the subject of police harassment and Latin-script schools had been closed, devastated and robbed.  Residents of the Transdnistrian region could not elect their leaders democratically, nor could they take part in Moldovan elections.  Trafficking in human beings through the Transdnistrian region had continued to be a serious problem.  The international community had a responsibility to protect human rights, above all in situations where there was a compelling need for human protection.

MARIE YVETTE BANZON-ABALOS ( Philippines) noted that the collective commitment to enhance the human rights work of the United Nations had come to fruition with the commencement of the work of the Human Rights Council.  The first year of the Council’s operation was a crucial period, as Member States had laid the building blocks for its functioning.  She was confident that the Council’s mechanisms and procedures, including the periodic review mechanism, thematic work, the working groups and special rapporteurs, would find their essential shape within the year.  She thanked Member States for putting their trust in the Philippines’ capacity to make the human rights machinery more effective, cooperative and credible.

The Philippines took its candidature pledges to the Council seriously and had made concrete gains in realizing those commitments, she said.  Her country had just passed a law abolishing the death penalty enabling it to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.  The Government also had intensified efforts to address pressing human rights issues, including through the creation of a national task force and an independent commission to investigate reports of human rights violations.  The Philippines was ready to invite the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions in the first quarter of 2007.  In conclusion, she urged the Committee to use its expertise and influence to mainstream respect for the human rights of migrants into all aspects of the work of the United Nations.

ROSEMARY BANKS ( New Zealand) said her country had campaigned strongly for the Human Rights Council and was ambitious for its future.  However, there had to be political will to make it work.  The Universal Periodic Review of human rights in all Member States would be a milestone; it was essential that the review be objective, based on partnership and open dialogue.  New Zealand was deeply concerned about the human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), which had allocated massive amounts of funding to military consolidation and to missile and nuclear testing while its people suffered from deprivation of their basic economic, cultural and social rights.  In Myanmar, the junta regime had been unwilling to cooperate with the international community and was drifting towards isolation.

Recent violence in Sri Lanka was a serious concern for New Zealand, which called on the parties involved to declare a ceasefire and to commit themselves to peace talks in Geneva, she said.  In the Sudan, human rights violations had not abated, and New Zealand –- which supported Security Council resolution 1706 -- believed that a United Nations presence in Darfur was the best chance for peace and security in the region.  Member States had to send a clear and united message to the Government of the Sudan that the situation in Darfur must end.  In Zimbabwe, starvation resulting from economic mismanagement and politically motivated distribution had been only part of a picture of abuse and repression.  New Zealand also noted with regret the deterioration in human rights in Iran, including censorship and the reported execution of minors, and urged Iran to engage constructively with the international community on human rights issues.

KENZO OSHIMA ( Japan) noted that the United Nations had played a key role in standard-setting in the field of human rights.  Recent successes were the draft International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which was one of the first substantive outcomes of the Human Rights Council, and the draft of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.  Japan hoped that the General Assembly would adopt those draft Conventions as early as possible.

While the establishment of the Human Rights Council represented a significant step forward, his delegation was concerned that its performance so far had not met expectations, he said.  Japan earnestly hoped the Council would find its way to foster a new spirit of international cooperation and address grave violations of human rights with decisiveness, swiftness and flexibility.  His country supported efforts of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to strengthen her Office’s country engagement.

He stressed the need for the international community to act in a unified way to address grave human rights violations, drawing special attention to ongoing serious human rights violations in the DPRK.  The issue of abduction of foreign nationals, including Japanese nationals, by DPRK agents remained unresolved.  Japan called on the DPRK to respond to last year’s General Assembly resolution on the human rights situation in that country as well as to the concerns expressed in the recently adopted Security Council resolution 1718.  He also mentioned the presence in the conference room today of family members of the abductees and their supporters.  His delegation strongly hoped that the deliberations of the Third Committee would assist in their earnest desire to resolve these painful cases as soon as possible, in full respect of humanitarian and human rights concerns.  Japan appreciated the efforts of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in the DPRK and strongly urged the DPRK to accept a visit from him as soon as possible.

NADYA RASHEED, observer of Palestine, said it was painfully distressing to recount, year after year, the massive human rights violations committed by Israel, the occupying Power, against the Palestinian civilian population that it had held hostage for 39 years.  Not a day, not a minute had passed without Israel deliberately violating international law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.  Israel had committed war crimes and State terrorism.  Each year, the lives of the Palestinian people had deteriorated in all aspects -– political, security, economic, social and humanitarian.  More than 10,000 Palestinians, including more than 350 children and 120 women, continued to be held in Israeli prisons with extremely restricted access to the outside world.

The occupying Power had continued with unlawful settler colonialism, more than doubling the number of settlers in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, she said.  Israel could no longer justify its expansionist wall as a security measure, as it had acknowledged that its political purpose was to annex its illegal settlements.  In Gaza, the Palestinians had continued to suffer declining economic and social conditions as a result of Israel’s ongoing military campaign.  The situation had caused immeasurable hardships to the refugee population.  Everyone who respected international law should see eye-to-eye with the Special Rapporteur’s statement that it remained difficult to reconcile Israel’s commitment to the rule of law with the litany of violations of human rights committed against the Palestinian people.  Israel could not continue to use the guise of security to continue to subjugate an entire people.  Both Palestinians and Israelis deserved freedom and security; the only way for this to happen would be to bring an end to the occupation and to the colonization of Palestinian land.

KIM CHANG GUK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) said that, despite the mandate of the United Nations to settle all issues on the principles of equality, respect for sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs, the old conception of “strength is justice” had prevailed.  Some forces continued to commit illegal and evil acts, such as invading other countries outside its territory and slaughtering innocent civilians at random in those countries for the sake of their own strategic and selfish interests, dividing the world into “good or evil” and “democratic or dictatorial States”.  The illegal “war against terrorism” pursued by the United States and the recent massacre of civilians in Lebanon perpetrated by Israel were barbarous acts which utterly ignored international laws and human rights and also the international community.

The Third Committee should be a model in denouncing such crimes against humanity, he said.  It was deplorable, however, that the Committee had been converted into a place of taking issues with developing countries and a scene for the arbitrariness and high-handedness of shameless criminals.  A pressing issue in improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms was to put an end to the invasion of and interference in the internal affairs of sovereign States perpetrated under the pretext of “protection of human rights”.  Another pressing issue was to put an end to double standards and selectivity in dealing with human rights issues.  In particular, he noted that the European Union every year brought out the abduction of a few Japanese while keeping mum about the crimes against humanity committed by Japan against the Korean people, such as the kidnapping and forcible drafting of 8.4 million, slaughtering of 1 million and taking of 200,000 as “comfort women” for the Japanese military.  If the standard applied by the European Union was fair, it should take up first the crimes committed by the United States, Israel and Japan, and the human rights situation of countries in its own region.

HENRI-PAUL NORMANDIN ( Canada) said that the failure to address human rights issues did not make them disappear and that societies could not heal without the recognition of wrongs.  In that context, Canada had recently offered a formal apology and compensation for the head tax that Chinese immigrants to Canada had been forced to pay between 1885 and 1923, and approved a process to assess claims of sexual or physical abuse suffered at school by indigenous peoples.  Internationally, the Security Council, with the primary mandate to uphold international peace and security, was accountable for discharging the responsibility to protect.

The killing of over 60 journalists and media assistants so far this year had been disturbing and, in Belarus and Cuba, independent journalists had worked under the threat of criminal sanctions, he said.  The General Assembly last year had decided it would continue its examination of human rights in Iran during the current session, and that would be done in the weeks to come.  Canada was also concerned with human rights in China, including an apparent crackdown on human rights defenders and shooting of unarmed Tibetans.  The Government of the Sudan was urged to end suffering in Darfur and accept the United Nations mission called for in resolution 1706.  Israel’s right to defend itself against terrorism was recognized, but it had a duty to protect Palestinian civilians.  In Haiti, there had been positive developments.  In Afghanistan, there had to be a clear political commitment by the Afghan Government to take decisive action against those who most overtly defied the rule of law.

MUHAMMAD ANSHOR ( Indonesia) said his country had always believed in upholding the protection and promotion of human rights and continued to update its domestic laws and institutional structure in that regard.  Indonesia was extremely gratified by the creation of the Human Rights Council, which had strengthened the human rights machinery of the United Nations.  His delegation warmly welcomed the adoption by the Council of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the agreement reached on the draft Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.  Indonesia also was pleased by developments in the area of monitoring, including the preservation of the system of special procedures of the Human Rights Council, and noted the importance of the proposal by the High Commissioner for Human Rights to create a unified standing treaty body.

His delegation supported current efforts that emphasized respect for human rights as an end in itself while addressing human rights problems resulting from foreign occupation and armed conflicts, taking fully into account their root causes.  However, there was a need to step up efforts by strengthening existing mechanisms, within and outside the United Nations, to promote mutual understanding and respect among various religions, cultures and civilizations.  He also noted that the lack of national capacity in the field of human rights was a common problem in the developing world.  To address those problems, his delegation supported the creation of a human rights fund, similar to the newly established Democracy Fund launched last year.  Such a scheme, established within the Human Rights Council and supported by the OHCHR could take the international community beyond the perennial politicization of human rights issues, he said.

ALEKSANDR STRIGELSKY ( Belarus) said that tackling human rights issues was a difficult and controversial process, and that the human rights mechanism would be streamlined with the creation of the Human Rights Council.  Belarus supported the view that Member States should discuss the human rights situations of all countries, with no exception.  Interaction had been poisoned by country-specific resolutions, which had been totally negative instruments.  In Belarus, the legal framework had been based on legal provisions used in democratic countries.  Major challenges loomed for the Third Committee, and it was, therefore, important to stick to a constructive approach.

JOSÉ LUIS RODAS SUÁREZ ( Bolivia) said his Government was committed to promoting human rights, particularly cultural, economic and social rights.  The Government sought the eradication of poverty and all forms of exclusion and exploitation in order to realize the right to dignity of all persons.  Bolivia assigned a high priority to addressing the root causes of inequality.  His country had invested in programmes aimed at ensuring the right to food, particularly for excluded groups, including children, women, indigenous people, those living in rural areas, older persons and persons with disabilities.  Also, Bolivia promoted rural and agrarian development as part of its efforts to protect ethnic and cultural diversity.  His delegation called for the establishment of an international framework for the protection of traditional knowledge, to protect against commercialization and to assure people of their international property rights.  Those principles had been recently upheld at meetings of the Non-Aligned Movement in Malaysia and in Cuba.

Bolivia called on Member States to adopt at the current session the draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  He recalled that Heads of State at the 2005 World Summit had made a commitment to continue to struggle for the rights of the indigenous people of the world, including through consultation and cooperation with them.  The Declaration would support efforts to find solutions to the problems facing the world’s indigenous peoples and help promote respect for their economic, social and civil rights.

HOSSEIN PANAHIAZAR ( Iran) said a few countries tended to divide the world into two confronting blocks -- human rights claimants, on the one hand, and human rights defendants, on the other -- with the former in the habit of attributing violations to the latter while portraying their own record as perfect.  No country could claim perfection in its human rights record.  The appalling situation in Guantanamo Bay, torture in Iraqi prisons, secret detention centres in Europe and inhumane treatment of the Palestinian people by the Israeli regime were but a few examples of gross violations of human rights by the so-called champions of human rights.

There had been a rise in discrimination on the basis of religion and ethnic origin in many Western countries, he said.  Muslims and certain ethnic minorities had been subjected to verbal and physical attacks, and to discrimination in jobs and housing.  They had been deprived of practicing their faith in public places and from observing traditional dress codes.  Muslims had been unfairly and falsely branded with, and accused of, extremist ideas, and increasingly targeted by police and security agents.  Certain politicians in the West had been playing on public fears of ethnic and religions groups, particularly Muslims.  In Canada, individuals had been deprived of their liberty awaiting trial or sentencing, and there had been allegations of police brutality and inappropriate use of chemical agents by law enforcement authorities.  Indigenous women and girls had meanwhile suffered from a high level of discrimination and violence, and Iran would be presenting a draft resolution on indigenous people and immigrants in Canada.

TAMAR TCHITANAVA ( Georgia) highlighted the recent achievements of her Government towards the promotion and protection of human rights, including through reforms of the judiciary, law enforcement and penitentiary systems and of national legislation.  The Government had moved to implement recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur on torture following his visit to the country in 2005.  Several criminal cases had been initiated into cases of torture and ill-treatment, and those law enforcement officers found guilty had been imprisoned.  Georgia also had made progress in protecting the rights of minorities and freedom of religion and belief.

Regrettably, the human rights of Georgians living on the territory of the Russian Federation were gravely violated, she said.  Her delegation called again on the Russian Federation and the international community to protect the rights of Georgian migrants.  She also drew attention to the human rights situation in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Georgia, where about 250,000 people had been expelled from their birth place in a campaign of ethnic cleansing and genocide.  She noted the importance of recommendations made by the Special Representative on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons to the de facto authorities in Abkhazia, urging them to waive discriminatory citizenship legislation, to admit United Nations civilian police without further delay and to cooperate with the establishment of a permanent international human rights office in Gali, as repeatedly urged by the Security Council.  She noted meanwhile that the United Nations Human Rights Office in Sokhumi had not yet achieved any tangible results and that the human rights situation remained precarious in the conflict zones.  Most of the grave violations of human rights happened in the zone of responsibility of Russian peacekeepers who did virtually nothing to prevent or confront them, she said.

MARIANA OLIVERA WEST ( Mexico) said that with the advent of the Human Rights Council, it was her country’s hope that States would overcome the inertia that had hampered its predecessor.  As the Council was at a formative stage, innovative approaches were needed to deal with the challenges faced by it.  The Third Committee had to be revitalized to make it more efficient and to avoid unnecessary duplication that would be detrimental to itself and to the Council.

Mexico was concerned by those who put the security agenda before the human rights agenda, she said.  Respect for human rights was a basic tool against any threat to international peace and security; to do otherwise would be to pave the way for terrorists to become even stronger.  Mexico would be presenting a draft resolution on the protection of human rights in the struggle against terrorism.  Regarding migrants, she said their rights had to be respected, regardless of their status; that was an obligation for all States under international law.  Border controls had to treat migrants as persons with rights.  Migration had to be approached through international cooperation and shared responsibility; otherwise, migrants would turn to illegal ways to cross borders.

ALFREDO LOPEZ CABRAL ( Guinea-Bissau) stressed that human rights and basic freedoms were not matters that concerned only a certain number of countries but were the responsibility of all -- one of the founding principles of the United Nations.  Moreover, human rights must be viewed holistically, he said, noting that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights did not deal exclusively with civil and political rights but also included the right to education, the right to a decent living and other rights.  The world must not forget those other rights, including the right to development, which should be a priority.

He expressed regret that the Third Committee limited itself to mutual criticisms rather than promoting a universal view of human rights, and hoped the Committee would be inclined to have a more responsible dialogue.  His delegation also was concerned that there was too much overlap and duplication between the work of the Third Committee and the Human Rights Council.  That important issue should be addressed within the framework of reforms.  He also urged those with the means to ensure that developing countries were in a position to implement and defend human rights.

MARTIN BELINGA-EBOUTOU ( Cameroon) said that more attention had to be given to the right to development.  The various reports put before the Committee had testified to an abysmal gap between principles and reality; it had been particularly shocking to learn that a child died of hunger every five seconds.  Much remained to be done.  Elaborating and adopting a draft protocol to the International Convent on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in order to set up a mechanism to ensure such rights were seen as a priority.

It was undeniable that the effective promotion of all human rights would be ensured by a more favourable system of exchanges, based on a global partnership for development that would lead to the implementation of an open, multilateral trading and financial system, and to a global resolution of the debt problem, he said.  Concerted action by States and nations had become more indispensable than ever if the indivisibility and interdependence of all human rights were to be secured.

ANDA FILIP, Permanent Observer of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, reviewed the conclusions reached at a seminar, for members of parliamentary human rights bodies, held in September in Geneva to consider what is the role of parliaments in ensuring due administration of justice.  That question had taken on particular importance in the context of the fights against terrorism and the very serious risk of an erosion of the most fundamental human rights guarantees.  In past years, the absolute prohibition on torture had been increasingly called into question, and some States had introduced legislation which allowed some measure of torture for the sake of security.  The seminar clearly stated that such practices were unacceptable.  If parliaments were to protect democracy, they needed to respect certain non-negotiable principles, one of which was the prohibition of torture.

Detention and imprisonment was another important issue of concern, she said.  The seminar encouraged all parliamentarians to visit detention centres and prisons, which could help prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.  The fight against terrorism also had resulted in the erosion of fair trial guarantees.  While only an independent judiciary would ensure that justice was done and was seen to be done, parliaments also had a role to play.  Parliaments could not stand by and do nothing under the pretext that there was a separation of powers.  The seminar strongly insisted on the constitutional powers parliaments had in a democratic State, particularly in the exercise of their oversight function.

Statements in Rights of Reply

Speaking in exercise of the right of reply, the representative of Sudan said Canada and New Zealand had once again resorted to their heinous and repeated practice of talking about the situation in Darfur with an approach that betrayed prejudice and which aimed to subvert the nascent peace in Sudan.  Referral to the Security Council and resolutions in the Third Committee had indicated politicization and bad intentions.  Canada and New Zealand were not members of the Security Council, but they had been expressing the political agenda of some States that were.  He said the position of Sudan on resolution 1706 was clear as daylight, and the Committee was not the place to discuss it.  Canada and New Zealand’s support for the practices of slavery and apartheid had been well known, as was the tragic situation of their indigenous peoples and migrants.  Sudan had acknowledged that it faced a crisis in Darfur; the Abuja Peace Accord had been the culmination of its efforts to address the issue.  Rather than supporting and strengthening that initiative, the positions of Canada and New Zealand could only be a hindrance, contrary to the interest of the Sudanese people.  The two States should show courage and submit reports on the situation of their indigenous peoples and migrants; Islamophobia and enmity to freedom of religion had also been emerging in both countries.  Sudan would not allow any State to subvert the peace process.

The representative of Cuba said nearsightedness seemed to be the worst affliction of those who had come to make speeches about the situation of human rights in countries other than their own.  Tinges of racial supremacy in some of the speeches had been almost shameful.  In the case of Canada, there was an urgent need for the services of an ophthalmologist.  In the long list of violations that its representative had presented, no mention had been made of abuses south of Canada’s border.  How could it be that nothing was said about torture committed by its imperial neighbour?

If the Canadian record was so clean on human rights, why had Canada opposed the adoption of the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People?  He said it was known by all that the original population of Canada, the Inuit and Indians and others, were in a precarious situation, deprived of the benefits of the natural resources on their land.  They faced a choice of either assimilation or marginalization; they were over-represented in prisons and underrepresented in the workforce.

Canada had become an accomplice in the war adventures of its imperial neighbour and the flagrant violations of human rights that neighbour had carried out under the pretext of the war on terrorism.  He said Cuba had come through a long struggle against imperialism and its accomplices; it did not need hypocritical lessons presented like bottled soda.

The representative of Japan said his country did not accept the statement of the representative of the DPRK that the issue of the abduction of Japanese citizens had been settled and was no longer a pending issue.   Many abductees had not yet returned to Japan; it was an ongoing issue.  It was the worst violation of human rights, in that it related to the lives and security of many citizens.  It was an issue for the international community, as the victims had not only been Japanese nationals; citizens of other countries had been abducted as well, a point that the Special Rapporteur had made a few days ago.

The General Assembly had adopted a resolution on the DPRK last year, and, at the Group of Eight (G-8) Summit in Saint Petersburg, a strong statement was incorporated into the chairman’s summary, he said.  In resolution 1718 after its proclaimed nuclear testing, the Security Council had called upon the DPRK to respond to other concerns of the international community.

Regarding the fate of the victims of abductions whose families were in the Committee room today, no satisfactory explanation had been provided by the authorities of the DPRK, he continued.  Japan urged the DPRK to revise its response to enquires on the matter, return abducted persons, carry out investigations and surrender the criminals responsible for abductions.  The numbers given by the representative of the DPRK regarding conscription and “comfort women” could not be accepted, and could not be used as an excuse for abductions.  Any linking of the two issues could not be accepted.

The representative of Ethiopia took the floor to refute what she called the “baseless allegations” made by the representative of Canada about her country’s human rights record.  Ethiopia was fully committed to the promotion of human rights in accordance with its constitutional and international obligations.  Individuals accused of criminal acts were brought to justice in fair trials.  Her delegation had already described the circumstances leading to the arrest of those people involved in violent unrest.  Those trials were being carried out in full compliance with national and international obligations and were fully open to families of the defendants and to local and international observers, she said.

Also speaking in exercise of the right of reply in response to the statement made by the representative of Canada, the representative of Uzbekistan challenged the description of events in Andijan last year as a “peaceful demonstration” without regard for the fact that dozens of people were killed by the so called peaceful demonstrators carrying arms.  Last year, the Third Committee had adopted a resolution which expressed concern regarding the situation of the so called refugees connected with the events in Andijan.

Now the Canadian representative reflected those concerns and added his concerns about those who had returned to Uzbekistan.  He said his delegation had told the Third Committee last year that those people who left had been fooled, and that the Government did not have any problems with them.  Last year his Government had said it was ready to work with the international community to investigate the events at Andijan, but those countries sponsoring the resolution had categorically refused to cooperate.  They had demanded that Uzbekistan accept a so called independent international investigation.  How could one talk about sovereignty in such a situation?  He suggested that it would be more helpful to work in a cooperative way.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record