Archive for April, 2011

Voting results of Special Session resolution on Syria

Click here for final resolution text

Voting YES were: Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Chile, France, Ghana, Guatemala, Hungary, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Maldives, Mauritius, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Senegal, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland, UK, USA, Uruguay, and Zambia.

Voting NO were: Bangladesh, China, Cuba, Ecuador, Gabon, Malaysia, Mauritania, Pakistan, Russian Federation.

ABSTAINING were: Cameroon, Djibouti, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Uganda, Ukraine.

ABSENT were: Angola, Bahrain, Jordan, and Qatar.

NGOs urge US to hold strong on UN text slamming Syria

UN Watch, the Geneva-based rights group that heads an international coalition opposing Syria’s candidacy for the UN Human Rights Council, strongly praised today’s revised American draft resolution (April 29) with a new first paragraph that “unequivocally condemns the use of lethal violence against peaceful protestors by the Syrian authorities” — thereby restoring, as UN Watch requested yesterday, the direct attribution of responsibility to the Assad government that had been removed in yesterday’s US draft.

Click here for the full story at the UN Watch website.

Controversial Durban Committee meets in Geneva – Day 4

For a comprehensive summary of today’s proceedings, click here.

Today’s proceedings of the Ad-Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of Complimentary Standards focused on an attempt to reach consensus on what to discuss under the second topic under consideration, “Advocacy and incitement to racial, ethnic, national and religious hatred,” and whether to include the issue of profiling under this header. Ultimately, the President of the meeting decided not to recommend the issue to the Chair for inclusion in next week’s discussion, favoring xenophobia and the establishment of national mechanisms to protect against discrimination instead. Continue reading ‘Controversial Durban Committee meets in Geneva – Day 4′

Controversial Durban committee meets in Geneva – Day 3

For a comprehensive summary of today’s proceedings, click here.

Today’s proceedings of the Ad-Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of Complimentary Standards centered on reviewing the final three topics remaining for discussion and determining which would be included in the substantive sessions starting Monday.

The meeting started with a disagreement over the inclusion of the topic of racism in sport. Costa Rica withdrew its proposal that the issue be discussed, but the EU requested that it be kept on the agenda but moved to a later time slot to enable a colleague to give a report on the issue. There was disagreement between the EU and the African Group as to whether this was appropriate so the issue was tabled and debate opened on the topic of “the establishment of national mechanisms to protect against discrimination.”

The EU presented the topic, as it is an EU initiative. The AG and OIC considered the word “discrimination” by itself to be too broad and requested that it be changed to “racial discrimination,” which the EU resisted, pointing out that this would ignore the issue of xenophobia. There was disagreement as well concerning what exactly substantive discussion of the issue would involve: outlining norms and standards for national human rights institutions, the identification of procedural gaps, or establishing procedures for implementation of recommendations.

Discussion then moved on to the next topic, “procedural gaps with regard to ICERD,” which had been added to the agenda the previous day at the request of the cross-regional group. Brazil elaborated that the two aspects of the issue are identifying protection gaps in ICERD and strengthening existing mechanisms, and suggested that discussion of the issue be postponed until the next session of the Ad-Hoc Committee to allow time for consultations with capitals. Algeria suggested the issue had already been satisfactorily covered in previous sessions and that it would be wasting time to discuss it further. Brazil replied that discussions of the issue in the past had been hampered by lack of trust and differing agendas between the delegations, and that further discussion could be fruitful. There was also disagreement between the delegations on the value of inviting ICERD experts to speak to the committee, and as to whether the role of the committee was to address procedural gaps or only substantive ones.

For the discussion on racism in sport, the UK began by presenting its own experience with combating racism in sport, and Brazil supported the topic. In the afternoon the Chair proposed that the topics of xenophobia, incitement to racial hatred, and national mechanisms against racism showed the most promise of achievement, and asked if those could be agreed upon as the topics of discussion for the following week. The US presented an action plan for the second topic adopted from a similar effort against religious hatred, which Algeria opposed the circulation of. The day ended with conflict between Algeria, Nigeria, and Pakistan on the one hand and the US and EU on the other over priorities and how the agreed-upon issues should be discussed, but overall there was consensus on which issues would be included in next week’s discussion.

Controversial Durban committee meets in Geneva – Day 2

For a comprehensive summaries of today’s proceedings, Click here.
Today’s proceedings of the Ad-Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of Complimentary Standards centered on narrowing the 6 topics identified as possible areas of focus for substantive discussion next week down to 2 or 3.  Of the 6 topics proposed (xenophobia, incitement to racial hatred, racist acts committed through communication technologies, racial profiling, racism and sport, and the establishment of national mechanisms to protect against discrimination), Argentina for the cross-regional group said they are willing to discuss xenophobia and profiling. They also proposed the additional topic of “procedural gaps to the implementation of the ICERD” focused on follow-up issues. The African Group (AG) and OIC said they needed more time to study this proposal. Brazil stressed that this point is very important for the cross-regional group. The EU opted for the discussion of topic 6 and suggested that they identify gaps first before going on to develop standards, while Nigeria for AG and Pakistan for OIC expressed their preference for the first 4 topics. The meeting then proceeded to  discussion of the merits of the first four topics.

Topic 1: Xenophobia
The Chair said that they needed to develop a definition of xenophobia and its relations to racism. There is incomplete treatment in existing international instruments. Brazil said that the Committee needs to identify protection  gaps for xenophobia. Liechtenstein and the EU argued that the notion of xenophobia has been developed by CERD in its general comments and recommendations.

Nigeria, Egypt and Algeria supported discussion of this issue and argued that the mandate of the committee includes discussion of new norms, not just gaps. Algeria also said that countries signed the ICERD, not all the work by the experts. USA said that the ICERD is a wider document and does not only include racism but also xenophobia. Brazil for the cross-regional group agreed with the topic to be discussed and asked for the contribution of experts.

Topic 2: Advocacy and incitement to racial, ethnic, national and religious hatred
The US asked to change the title of the topic to the one of the resolution adopted by consensus at the previous HRC session. They are not comfortable with the notion of incitement. Nigeria and Egypt did not accept the US position, to which the US responded that they were not comfortable discussing this topic as stated, and urged the Committee to focus on finding areas of agreement that would lead to concrete progress instead of wasting time on rehashing old and insurmountable differences in opinion that will lead nowhere.

Topic 3: Racial and xenophobic acts committed through information and communication technologies
Liechtenstein indicated that the Council of Europe protocol on cyber hate did not enjoy broad consensus, which is why it is a separate protocol from the convention, which few countries have signed onto. The  US agreed with this analysis. Nigeria for the AG and Pakistan for the OIC said that it was time for the UN to adopt a similar convention. Japan for the cross-regional group said they were not comfortable with this proposal, which required a lot of technical expertise.

Topic 4: Racial, ethnic, and religious profiling
Nigeria for the AG said that profiling is an important issue as it is “rampant.” When asked by the EU to offer examples, they referred to the reports by the Special Rapporteur on racism and their own experiences when traveling.

Discussion will continue on Thursday with further discussion on the topics.

Controversial Durban committee meets in Geneva – Day 1

 The Ad-Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of Complimentary Standards was established by the UN Human Rights Council in 2006, in accordance to the Durban Declaration and Program of Action. In its previous sessions, the Committee dealt with highly contentious and controversial issues, such as defamation of religion and incitement to religious hatred, which often polarized the debate.

Unable to elect a chair in October of last year following the resignation of the Algerian ambassador, the Committee postponed the session to the following year. On Monday, April 11, 2011, the Committee resumed. Scheduled to last two weeks, the first day of the session has already evidenced tension.

The first item of business was the election of a chair. Ambassador Jerry Matjila of South Africa, was appointed chair. In a show of humility, Ambassador Matjila admitted that no country can say it is immune from manifestations of racism, not even his own. He expressed his desire to find common ground between states, that he respected the unique and varied approaches of each country. The Ambassador set ambitious goals, and appealed to each state to draw on the diversity of others in order to move this process forward.

After adopting the provisional agenda, the chair moved to a matter on which there was great divergence: the program of work. Ambassador Majila insisted on asking the Committee to adopt a blank program of work – a schedule that would say when the committee was meeting, but not what they were meeting to discuss. This was opposed strongly by the EU, supported by the US and Switzerland. Iraq also acknowledged that the absence of the topics to be discussed from the program of work is “mysterious” and “ambiguous.”

The EU expressed a number of reservations, most importantly on the substance of the discussion and the methodology to be used. It warned of “an adventure with tsunamis and earthquakes.”

The Chair responded that he would resign if the committee did not trust him. Later, he was persuaded to circulate the list of four topics he chose for discussion, out of a list of 22 possible ones, and went on to explain them in more detail.

The first topic was xenophobia. In an atypical moment of self-reflection, the Ambassador of South Africa condemned the recent xenophobic attacks in his country, where, “foreigners were burnt alive,” calling them “shameful.” He also said that they need to define what “Xenophobia” means, to which countries expressed concern that this endeavor is outside of the Committee’s mandate.

The second topic on incitement could potentially bring back the deleterious notion of “defamation of religion,” which was removed at the last HRC session. The Chair argued that discussing it at this stage was “ripe.”

The third issue, racism on the internet, required technical expertise, Switzerland argued. The EU said that at the Council of Europe, the issue was dealt in the wider framework of cybercrime. Having not ratified the protocol of the council of Europe, the USA said it was in no position to discuss this theme in the ad-hoc committee.

Last but not least, the fourth issue, racial profiling after September 11, also raised eyebrows.

The EU’s first reaction was to ask the Chair how he was possibly able to narrow the list to these four topics and expressed its concern that certain of these themes  were out of its “comfort zone,” and not appropriate in the ad-hoc committee. The USA and Switzerland were trying to identify where the chair was trying to lead them with these subjects. The USA proposed to merge item 2 with item 4.  Switzerland concluded that it was willing to accept topic 1 and 4 but topic 3 isn’t a subject they would be willing to discuss.

During the discussion, Nigeria for the African Group said that “the EU confirmed his fears and suspicions that they are not willing to see the process take off the ground.”

The Chair, leaving the door open for new discussions topics, added “racism and sports” and “the establishment and maintaining of national mechanisms to prevent racism” on his list. A compromise was reached to suspend the meeting till Wednesday, April 13, in order to allow for consultations with capitals. On Wednesday and Thursday the topics will be discussed in an informal setting, facilitated by the Ambassador of Botswana. The resumption of the formal process is set for Friday, April 15.

45 rights groups urge UN Human Rights Council to fire Qaddafi-linked officials Ziegler & Al-Hajjaji

Veteran Qaddafi rep sits on mercenaries expert group meeting today

  

GENEVA, April 5 – An international coalition of 45 human rights groups today urged Ban Ki-moon and UN rights chief Navi Pillay to call on the UN Human Rights Council to fire two officials for their alleged actions over three decades to shield Libyan dictator Col. Qaddafi from scrutiny of his regime’s gross violations of human rights. (See full text below.)

The appeal names Jean Ziegler, a member of the UNHRC Advisory Committee, who in 1989 announced the creation of the “Moammar Qaddafi Prize for Human Rights.” When Libya’s rights record was reviewed in November, a Libyan-funded group tied to Ziegler distributed a 2010 book, edited by Ziegler, which likens Qaddafi to the philosopher Rousseau.

The 45 NGOs, mostly from Africa, also urged the council to fire Najat Al-Hajjaji, Qaddafi’s long-time representative to UN human rights bodies, from the council’s expert working group on mercenaries and human rights — which is now holding a week-long session in Geneva. Continue reading ’45 rights groups urge UN Human Rights Council to fire Qaddafi-linked officials Ziegler & Al-Hajjaji’

NRO-Aufruf zur Beendigung der Straffreiheit derjenigen, die das Gaddafi-Regime innerhalb des UNO Menschenrechtsrates ermächtigt haben

NRO-Aufruf zur Beendigung der Straffreiheit derjenigen, die das Gaddafi-Regime  innerhalb des UNO Menschenrechtsrates ermächtigt haben

Die unterzeichnenden Menschenrechts- und Nichtregierungsorganisationen,

Geleitet von den Grundsätzen und Zielen der Charta der Vereinten Nationen und der Allgemeinen Erklärung der Menschenrechte,

Bekräftigen die UN-Menschenrechtsrat Resolution S-15/1, welche tiefe Besorgnis über den Tod von hunderten Zivilisten in Libyen zum Ausdruck brachte, eindeutig die Anstiftung zu Feindseligkeit und Gewalt gegenüber der Zivilbevölkerung auf höchster Stufe der libyschen Regierung ablehnte, und aufs Strengste die jüngsten schockierenden und systematischen Menschenrechtsverletzungen, einschliesslich rücksichtsloser bewaffneter Angriffe gegen Zivilisten, aussergerichtlicher Tötungen, willkürlicher Festnahmen, Haft und Folter von friedlichen Demonstranten in Libyen, wovon einige Fälle gar als Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit einzustufen sein könnten, verurteilte; Continue reading ‘NRO-Aufruf zur Beendigung der Straffreiheit derjenigen, die das Gaddafi-Regime innerhalb des UNO Menschenrechtsrates ermächtigt haben’

Swiss TV endorses UN Watch report on Jean Ziegler & Qaddafi prize

Segments from the Swiss TV program “10vor10,” March 25, 2011

Though he’s never really been a favorite of the West, the Libyan dictator Gaddafi was courted by many from the West before the popular uprising broke out against him. A serious charge, among others, was an excessive closeness with the Tyrant of Tripoli.

This same accusation has now been raised in Switzerland against Jean Ziegler. A colleague of the emeritus professor of sociology vehemently demands that Ziegler quit his human rights mandate at the UN. Meanwhile, Jean Ziegler denies he ever supported Gaddafi. Andy Müller reports. Continue reading ‘Swiss TV endorses UN Watch report on Jean Ziegler & Qaddafi prize’

Victory: Salzburg Festival cancels on U.N. rights official Jean Ziegler over Qaddafi ties

GENEVA, March 31 – After UN Watch’s latest campaign of UN speeches, articles and TV appearances exposing Jean Ziegler’s ties to the Qaddafi regime, the Austrian province of Salzburg cancelled a keynote speech by the UN Human Rights Council official at its prestigious cultural festival, a regional government spokesman confirmed today. Allegations of Ziegler’s closeness to Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi would have overshadowed his speech at the festival, which begins in July, the spokesman said.

“We congratulate the Salzburg Festival for doing the right thing in the end by denying its prestigious platform to the U.N.’s chief apologist for the Qaddafi regime,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, a Geneva-based monitoring group. “This is the first known public cancellation on Jean Ziegler, and we hope others will follow.”  In 2008, Amnesty International refused a request to disinvite Mr. Ziegler from its annual Swiss conference. Continue reading ‘Victory: Salzburg Festival cancels on U.N. rights official Jean Ziegler over Qaddafi ties’