Sixty-first General Assembly

Third Committee

36^th & 37^th Meetings (AM & PM)

THIRD COMMITTEE APPROVES DRAFT RESOLUTIONS ON INTERNATIONAL DRUG CONTROL, UN CRIME

PREVENTION PROGRAMME; HEARS REPORT BY EXPERT ON HUMAN RIGHTS IN BURUNDI

Drafts Introduced Concerning Convention on

Forced Disappearances, Declaration on Indigenous Peoples

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) today approved without a vote a draft resolution on international cooperation against the world drug problem and on strengthening the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme.

Also continuing its review of human rights issues, the Committee heard from Akich Okola, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Burundi, who expressed concern over the Government’s increasing intolerance of all forms of criticism.  If such intolerance continued, he said, Burundi would soon find itself once again “in a state of internal conflict”.  He appealed to the Government to show tolerance to its critics and to speed up the trial of alleged coup plotters, including a former President.  He also urged the international community to step up humanitarian and development assistance to Burundi.

In the discussion that followed, the representative of Burundi said that, while his delegation agreed with certain aspects of the report, there were aspects that gave rise to apprehension.  Burundi still had a long way to go after more than 40 years of human rights violations, he stated, adding that his Government was determined to improve the human rights situation and was committed to national reconciliation.

In a separate development, the Committee agreed to postpone its discussion on the report of the Human Rights Council, pending an invitation to the President of the Council to appear before it.

By the terms of the draft on international cooperation against the world drug problem, the General Assembly would urge States to ratify and implement the various international conventions on narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances as well as to promote and implement the outcomes of United Nations meetings on drugs and the Action Plan for the Implementation of the Declaration on the Guiding Principles of Drug Demand Reduction. 

That text would also have the Assembly urge States to step up national efforts to counter illicit drug abuse by 2008 and chart progress in reducing drug production and trafficking -– both goals set forth during the Assembly’s twentieth special session.  Further, the Assembly would call on States and organizations skilled at community capacity-building to give drug users treatment, health care and social services, particularly victims of HIV/AIDS and other blood-borne diseases.  The draft goes on to list myriad ways in which States could combat the drug scourge through a variety of actions, including public awareness campaigns, early intervention programmes, close cooperation with the International Narcotics Control Board and stronger and more internationally coordinated judicial and law enforcement activities.

Another draft adopted today on strengthening the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme, in particular its technical cooperation capacity, would have the Assembly urge States and relevant United Nations organizations to develop national and regional strategies to combat transnational organized crime, including trafficking in persons and related crimes, as well as ratify and implement the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, its related Protocols, the United Nations Convention against Corruption and treaties on terrorism.

Draft resolutions were also introduced today on the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and on the Working Group of the Commission on Human Rights to elaborate a draft declaration on indigenous people.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Monday, 6 November when it is expected to hear from Doudou Diène, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, and from Amanda Benavidez de Pérez, Chairperson of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the right of peoples to self-determination.

The Chairman also announced that, due to a scheduling change, the Committee would start its consideration of refugee questions on Tuesday, 7 November when a presentation by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees is expected.

Background

The Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) met today to continue its discussion of human rights issues.  For background, please see press release GA/SHC/3865 of 1 November.

The Committee had before it a note, by the Secretary-General, on the situation of human rights in Myanmar (document A/61/369/Corr.1), which contains corrections to paragraphs 56 and 57 of document A/61/369.

The Committee was expected to hear, also, the introduction of a draft resolution on the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (document A/C.3/61/L.17) and a draft on the Working group of the Commission on Human Rights to elaborate a draft declaration in accordance with paragraph 5 of General Assembly resolution 49/214 of 23 December 1994 (document A/C.3/61/L.18).

The Committee was also expected to take action on drafts concerning strengthening the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme, in particular its technical cooperation capacity (document A/C.3/61/L.9/Rev.1) and on international cooperation against the world drug problem (document A/C.3/61/L.8/Rev.2).

Human Rights in Burundi

AKICH OKOLA, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Burundi, who had, most recently, been in the country from 7 to 14 October, said that, unlike situations faced by other Independent Experts and Special Rapporteurs, the Government had left the door virtually open to him to carry out his work.  It had made commendable strides in social and economic rights, including free primary education and free health care for expectant mothers and children.  However, the human rights situation remained an area of great concern.  Violations had been reported on a daily basis.  Most violated had been the rights to life; to physical integrity; to the freedom, safety and inviolability of the person; to opinion; and to property.

Tensions between the Government and ruling party, on the one hand, and opposition parties, civil society and the media, on the other, had escalated, reaching a crisis point, following the arrest and detention, in July, of the former President, Domitien Ndayizeye, and former Vice President, Alphonse-Marie Kadege, among others, on allegations of planning a coup d’etat, he said.  The allegations had been widely perceived as an attempt to suppress opposition and settle old political scores.  The Government had, so far, failed to offer credible evidence implicating the suspects, who, in interviews with the Independent Expert, had claimed innocence.

Respect for freedom of expression and opinion was under threat, as a result of the Government’s increasing intolerance of individuals perceived to be against it, he said.  Intimidation and harassment of the independent media had increased.  In the first half of 2006, human rights observers had reported that 53 persons had been killed in Burundi; the main perpetrators had been members of the military, police, intelligence, administrators and Front National de Libération (FNL) combatants.  The justice system was under-resourced and inefficient, and prisons were seriously overcrowded.  The Government seemed to support the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but it did not seem ready to deal with the question of justice against those who might have committed serious crimes punishable under international criminal law.  Given the Government’s increasing intolerance of criticism, Burundi could find itself, again, in a state of internal conflict.  The Government was urged to speed up the trial of the alleged coup plotters, accelerate the establishment of transitional justice mechanisms, and show tolerance to its critics.  International donors were, meanwhile, called upon to increase humanitarian and development assistance.

Discussion

During the discussion that followed, the representative of Burundi first took the floor to respond to the findings contained in the report of the independent expert.  He said there were certain elements of the report that his delegation agreed with and certain aspects that gave rise to apprehension.  Burundi still had a long way to go, after more than 40 years of being afflicted by violations of human rights.  Political leaders had been assassinated, people massacred and property taken away.  It was impossible to improve the situation overnight, given that history.  He noted that the report focused on a particular period of time, before which the situation was even worse.  Surely, appreciable improvement had occurred.  The progress made was not enough, but he noted that a 5-year-old child could not shoulder the same responsibilities as a 50-year-old person.

His Government was determined to improve the human rights situation in the country and was committed to national reconciliation and to resolving questions of expropriation, tensions, justice and combating impunity.  He asked for understanding from the international community, as well as for further help and support.  Burundi remained open to cooperation, including with the Independent Expert, and would continue to work to ensure that all human rights were respected in the country.

Mr. OKOLA said it was true that many good things had happened in Burundi, in a very short period of time, since the establishment of a new Government, considering that the country had emerged from nearly 40 years of conflict.  However, it was important to constantly point out those things that tended to have a negative impact upon the good.  For example, he said that the almost casual way in which the Government had responded to the event in Muyinga, until pressure from human rights activists began to mount, indicated that the Government needed to be reminded that it needed to do certain things in a certain way.  Without such reminders, he feared that bad things would overcome the good things.

He noted the question, posed by the representative of Finland, about the treatment of those accused in an alleged coup attempt.  First, some of those individuals were clearly tortured in custody.  The persons responsible were known, yet no action was taken against them.  In his view, due process had not been followed, in relation to the accused.  Under Burundian law, a special court should have been constituted, immediately, to deal with the application of the prosecutor for the continued detention of those individuals, yet nothing, so far, had happened.

Regarding the statement made by the representative of Burundi that his Government was anxious to promote reconciliation, Mr. OKOLA recalled that he had spoken to many people about the level of support for the truth and reconciliation mechanism and the creation of a special chamber.  It seemed that there was very little support, by the Government, for the special chamber, and the Government seemed to be dragging its feet.  In his view, Burundi could not have one mechanism without the other.  If the country could not deal with the truth that came out, continued impunity would constrain the enjoyment of human rights.  It was important for the Government to appreciate the need to establish a special chamber, as part of the process of reconciliation.

He agreed that the international community had a role to play in supporting Burundi, not just in terms of reconciliation, but also in reconstruction.  Otherwise, he asked, what was to stop people from going back to the old ways that had destroyed the country?

Responding to questions from the representatives of Finland and Norway on the challenges ahead, he noted that the successful elections had led many to be hopeful that Burundi was on the road to joining the international community in respecting democracy.  However, he said, something had happened on way to the forum.  There was a discernible tendency, on the part of the current Government, to see everybody as its enemy; and, where those enemies happened to be people who could be arrested or detained, to use illegal methods in questioning them.  That, in his view, was what had happened in the case of at least three people arrested in connection with the alleged coup.  The due process of law was not followed in their case.  There was clear evidence that at least three of them had been tortured.  Also of concern was the fact that, notwithstanding every opportunity made available to the Government to respect the decision of the Supreme Court and free those individuals, it instead reverted to using legal manoeuvres to continue their detention.  It seems that the procedural guarantees cited by the Government were not applicable.

Elaborating on the role the special chamber could play in fostering transitional justice, he stressed that it was not enough simply to find out what had gone wrong in Burundi.  Certain things had happened in that country, which flew in the face of international criminal justice and which could only be dealt with if the special chamber was constituted as an independent entity.  The current judicial system was truly dysfunctional and could only benefit from the experience that would result from the establishment of a special chamber.  Then, they could see how true justice could be dispensed.

Turning to the peace agreement with the FNL, he said it was a good thing, but that peace remained fragile.  It depended on the degree to which the Government was seen to be impartial in implementing the peace agreement and in implementing the Arusha Accord.

He said that the United Nations integrated human rights mechanism was doing a very good job.  His report noted many attempts, made by that system, to bring human rights to the grassroots level in tackling such things as the casual attitude regarding sexual offences.  He also noted efforts under way to train people, especially security agents of the State, to respect human rights.  Such efforts would play an important role in making human rights a more conventional topic in Burundi, he said.

Human Rights Council

The Committee Chairman, HAMID AL BAYATI ( Iraq), announced that the Bureau had discussed, on Wednesday and again today, the question of extending an invitation to the President of the Human Rights Council to address the Committee.  He then asked if it was the wish of the Committee to invite the President to address the Committee.  Upon hearing no objections, it was so decided.

The representative of Finland said his delegation was slightly confused, as it had understood that the President would be addressing the Plenary before addressing the Committee.  He asked for clarification.

The representative of Mexico said his delegation was a bit irritated with the situation that had arisen in recent days.  The Committee had before it two recommendations from the Council, regarding forced disappearances and indigenous peoples; it had an obligation and an agreement to discuss them.  There was no reason for delay.  Mexico, therefore, asked that action be taken on the two recommendations immediately.

The representative of Gabon thanked the Chairman for his leadership.  He said that it had been understood, after consultations with other regional groups, that the President would appear before the Committee next week.  It was surprising that a delegation wanted to break that consensus.  The decision that had just been announced, reflected the state of mind that had prevailed during negotiations.

The representative of Cuba said his delegation just wanted to know what was going to happen now.  What procedure would the Committee follow?

The Chairman said the Committee had taken a decision that its discussion of agenda item 68 (report of the Human Rights Council) would resume next week.  As for the President of the Human Rights Council addressing the plenary, that was up to the Plenary, not the Committee

The representative of Liechtenstein said that his delegation would have liked to continue the discussion of agenda item 68, but it was happy to go along with the compromise.  It had the same question as Finland, and took it that the President would be presenting his report to the Plenary of the General Assembly, before coming before the Committee.

The Chairman thanked all delegations for their cooperation, and expressed congratulations for their having reached a consensus.

Introduction of Draft Resolutions

Introducing a draft resolution on the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (document A/C.3/61/L.17), the representative of France said his country had repeatedly appealed for adoption of the Convention.  The Convention was the result of more than 25 years of struggle by families of the victims of enforced disappearance and represented a very important step forward in the protection and promotion of human rights around the world. 

If the draft Convention was adopted by the General Assembly and ratified by States, a new crime would be recognized in international law, in peacetime and in war alike.  The Convention was a preventive instrument, which would a priori establish effective preventive mechanisms.  First, States parties would commit themselves to prohibit secret detention, strengthen procedural guarantees surrounding detention and punish those responsible for enforced disappearances.  The Convention also would establish an international follow-up mechanism in the form of a committee which could examine individual complaints and also play a preventive role by making site visits, among other functions.  The draft resolution was historic in many ways, as it was the first resolution of the new Human Rights Council.  If the Assembly adopted the draft resolution, the Convention would be open for signature at a signing ceremony in Paris in early 2007, he said. 

The representative of Peru then introduced a draft resolution on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (document A/C.3/61/L.18), which was the result of 24 years of work and extraordinary effort.  The text sought to establish a new kind of relationship between States and indigenous peoples.  The draft Declaration was above all an instrument of peace, not of conflict, and an important step towards the recognition, promotion and protection of the rights and freedoms of indigenous peoples.  The co-sponsors believed that the text, while not ideal, was no doubt the best option, given the lengthy discussions held.  He appealed to all delegations to support it to ensure the rights of a particularly vulnerable group of people, the indigenous peoples, who required the cooperation of all to attain their development objectives. 

The representative of Mexico made a brief statement noting that both of the proposed international instruments were the result of years of discussion.  Earlier today, his delegation had requested that the Third Committee proceed in taking a decision on those subjects.  Mexico believed that whether or not the President of the Human Rights Council addressed the Committee was irrelevant and had no implications for the work before the delegates.  After more than 24 years of discussion on those matters, it was time to take decisions, he said.  His delegation insisted on its request that the Committee act on the two resolutions immediately. 

The Chairman said that it was up to the sponsoring country to advise him about when to take action on a resolution. 

Action on texts

The representative of Italy noted that the draft resolution on strengthening the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme (document A/C.3/61/L.9/Rev.1) had attracted many additional co-sponsors.  She drew attention to a number of amendments to the draft, including -- in the operative paragraphs -– a reference to the need for national and regional strategies for combating crime.

The representative of Venezuela, referring to operative paragraph four, expressed reservations, saying that one could not draw a permanent connection between terrorism and transnational organized crime, as they had different motives.  Nevertheless, Venezuela would join the consensus in adopting the resolution.

The Committee than approved the draft without a vote.

Turning to the draft resolution on international cooperation against the world drug problem (document A/C.3/61/L.8/Rev.2), the representative of Mexico said that informal discussions had produced a proactive and consolidated text with a view to adoption without a vote.  It incorporated specific recommendations to combat the production, transportation and consumption of illicit drugs, with strengthened cooperation between Governments and relevant agencies.

The representative of Barbados then took the floor to make a general statement on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) expressing concern at the closure of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime regional office in Barbados.  CARICOM member States were not convinced that such a move would make their region safer.  More resources had to be directed to the region, not less.  As countries with limited resources, caught in the middle of an illicit trade in drugs and weapons, CARICOM could ill afford to be marginalized.  While it joined the consensus to adopt the draft resolution, CARICOM requested that its statement be included in the official proceedings of the meeting.

The representative of Venezuela then took the floor to express concern about the linkage between illicit drug trafficking, terrorism and transnational criminal activity, reiterating that no direct permanent connection could be made between terrorism and transnational organized crime.  Nevertheless, in its firm commitment to combat drugs, Venezuela would join the consensus.

The committee then approved the draft without a vote.

Speaking after the vote, the representative of Bolivia referred to paragraph 13 of the resolution, which referred to the eradication of illicit drug crops.  He explained that his country had established a strategy to combat drug trafficking and to re-evaluate the coca leaf, which should be recognized as the cultural patrimony of the Bolivian people.  It had been a nutritional complement to the indigenous peoples of Bolivia and its consumption had no adverse health effects -– rather, it had therapeutic value.  It was with a view to achieving consensus, however, that Bolivia had joined in approving the resolution.

The representative of Colombia said his delegation welcomed the resolution and recognized the significant input from States that had participated in its drafting.  It was very important to deal with a problem that affected the health, well-being and security of people the world over.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record