Human Rights Committee

Ninety-eighth Session

2703^rd Meeting* (AM)

Monitoring Body for International Civil, Political Rights Covenant Continues

 

Reading of General Comment on Article 19 Concerning Freedom of Opinion

 

Continuing a read-through of its draft “general comment” on article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which deals with the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Human Rights Committee today set language for six more paragraphs in the “first reading” draft of the 54-paragraph text.

The 18-member expert panel, which is meeting at Headquarters in New York through 26 March, is tasked with monitoring the Covenant’s worldwide implementation by examining compliance reports submitted by its 165 States parties.  It also regularly holds discussions on, and eventually publishes its interpretation of, the content of human rights provisions, in the form of general comments on thematic issues.

Kicking off today’s discussion on draft general comment no. 34 (document CCPR/C/GC/34/CRP.2), Michael O’Flaherty, expert from Ireland and the Committee’s Rapporteur for this general comment, recalled that, by elaborating on both the positive obligations and limitations of the freedom of expression and opinion, the text set out the “broad parameters” of that freedom.

In that context, he reminded the Committee that several issues were left hanging when its discussion left off on Wednesday.  Specifically addressing the proposal to insert a reference to “media monopolies” in paragraph 14, he said monopolies and related issues were addressed later in paragraphs 38 and 40.  But as the general comment’s “parent”, he saw “the logic of where things are”, but others might not and if they wanted such language moved forward, he was open to continuing the discussion.

On another outstanding matter, he said the Committee had not come to a decision on whether to slightly change or wholly delete a reference to “democratic society” in the first sentence of paragraph 14.  Mr. O’Flaherty said the notion that a free press was of paramount importance to a democratic society was a direct reference to the Committee’s jurisprudence, but, again, he was open to continuing the discussion.

Rajsoomer Lallah, expert from Mauritius, was among those who favoured deleting the term, because a free media was important to any society, democratic or otherwise.  Ruth Wedgewood, expert from the United States, reluctantly concurred that this reference should be deleted from the paragraph, not because the Covenant did not call for a democratic society, but because she believed that some countries might take advantage of the word there to bow out of their obligations to allow freedom of speech based on their lack of democracy.

As the experts continued to parse more technical language, syntax and style issues, Ms. Wedgewood cautioned against relying on “UN-English” to get the Committee’s message across.  The human rights Covenant and treaties were supposed to be “evocative and timeless documents, so I do believe prose matters”, she said.  In response, Mr. O’Flaherty said he had considered language that would last for centuries and had accordingly chosen the “safest” constructions based on the Committee’s previous decisions.

Ultimately, the Committee agreed to retain reference to democratic society after reaching consensus on an expanded reference that mirrored additions to paragraph 2 made on Wednesday:  “A free, unhindered and uncensored press or other media is of paramount importance in any society.  They constitute one of the foundation-stones of any free and democratic society.”

Based on a recommendation by Zonke Zanele Majodina, expert from South Africa, the Committee decided to move the last sentence from paragraph 14 into a new paragraph 14 bis.  A new sentence stating that “States parties must promote and protect media access for minority groups” would then be added to the new paragraph.

The Committee decided to “bracket” paragraph 15, which in its editing process means the paragraph is slated for possible deletion pending review of later paragraphs that might make paragraph 15’s language on the independence of government or publicly funded media superfluous.

Moving on to paragraphs 17, 18 and 19, which comprise a section on “access to information”, the Committee postponed any decision on a proposal by Krister Thelin, expert from Sweden, to reorder the section by moving paragraph 17 after paragraph 19 and addressed the paragraphs in their current order.

Introducing paragraph 17, Mr. O’Flaherty said it sought to address the implications of the right to seek and receive information and ideas.  The language might be “ugly and clunky”, but it sought to make reference to all relevant Covenant rights on the matter.

Christine Chanet, expert from France, reminded the Committee that access to information was not only about the rights guaranteed by the Covenant ‑‑ it was all information and all people’s access to it.  She suggested that a passage at the end of paragraph 17’s first sentence should make reference to “information and ideas of all kinds”.  The Committee agreed to that amendment.  The experts also deleted the last sentence of the paragraph, before adopting the paragraph as a whole.

Turning next to paragraph 18, the Committee decided, after one expert expressed concern that the language in the second sentence was “extremely restrictive”, to remove it for the time being, and return to it later.

When the Committee took up paragraph 19, the experts agreed to add a new sentence:  “State parties should make every effort to ensure easy, effective and practical access to State-controlled information in the public domain.”  The experts also decided to place language regarding accountability and transparency at the beginning of paragraph 19 and return to the specifics during its second reading.

The Human Rights Committee will hold its next public meeting at 10 a.m. Wednesday, 24 March, to take the progress report of the Special Rapporteur for Follow-up to Concluding Observations.

* *** *

__________

*     The 2700^th, 2701^st and 2702^nd Meetings were closed.

For information media • not an official record