Human Rights Council Holds Interactive Dialogue on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, Concludes Dialogue on the Human Rights of Migrants

AFTERNOON 26 June 2023

The Human Rights Council this afternoon held an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, and concluded an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants.

Morris Tidball-Binz, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, expressed regret that extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions continued to be recorded throughout the world with alarming numbers of victims. These included victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity, such as massacres and indiscriminate attacks against the civilian population, whose most frequent victims were women, children and the elderly, as well as journalists and human rights defenders. Deaths in custody and femicides were prevailing at a pandemic-like level.

Mr. Tidball-Binz said his report examined the scandalous phenomenon of deaths in prison. Most deaths in prison should not have occurred. Such deaths could have been prevented with simple, easily implementable measures. However, deaths in prison continued to occur, with vulnerable communities most often being victims. Urgent, specific measures were needed to prevent deaths in custody. The report contained recommendations in this regard. States had an obligation under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Vienna Declaration to prevent deaths in custody.

Mr. Tidball-Binz spoke on his visit to Argentina, and Argentina took the floor as the country concerned.

In the discussion, speakers underlined the crucial importance of preventing any form of arbitrary deprivation of life, including in prison, and the importance of ensuring accountability when such killings occurred. States had the duty to investigate any potentially unlawful death promptly, effectively, thoroughly, independently, impartially and transparently. States assumed direct responsibility for the lives of individuals deprived of liberty. Preventing deaths was key. Ways to reduce the number of prisoners, for example by applying non-custodial measures, could be explored. The Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death must be observed. It was the responsibility of States to take appropriate measures to prevent deaths in prison and to ensure that members of marginalised communities were not disproportionately affected. Speakers also called for the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur.

Speaking in the dialogue were the European Union, Finland on behalf of a group of countries, Ukraine on behalf of a group of countries, United States on behalf of a group of countries, Egypt, Burkina Faso, Liechtenstein, Armenia, Peru, Luxembourg, Costa Rica, Belgium, France, Indonesia, Iraq, United States, Malaysia, United Kingdom, Venezuela, State of Palestine, South Africa, Pakistan, Malawi, China, Switzerland, Yemen, Afghanistan, Cuba, Russian Federation, Algeria, Azerbaijan and the Philippines.

Also speaking were Human Rights Defender of the Republic of Armenia, Law Council of Australia on behalf of the International Bar Association, Penal Reform International, International Harm Reduction Association, Gulf Centre for Human Rights Limited, International Federation of Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture, Justiça Global, Colombian Commission of Jurists, Peace Brigades International, Conectas Direitos Humanos and Comisión Mexicana de Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos.

At the beginning of the meeting, the Council concluded its interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, which started in the previous meeting.

Felipe González Morales, Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, in concluding remarks, said regularisation was a key tool to protect the human rights of migrants themselves. As a stand-alone mechanism, this would not satisfy the rights of the migrant, but it was an important step, with a view to facilitating their integration into the destination society, avoiding administrative detention and arbitrary detention, and accessing services, among others. It was important to guarantee citizen participation when it came to migration policies and when it came to regularisation issues. The gender dimension was crucial to bear in mind: the specific conditions endured by women in host countries must be taken into account. The Council must keep discussing migration policies and establish strengthened monitoring mechanisms, such as the Commission that was under discussion.

In the discussion, many speakers expressed concern regarding the deaths of migrants in transit, noting the increase in migration flows in recent years, due to conflicts and environmental factors, among others. Migration posed social, political and economic challenges for all States. Female migrants particularly risked abuse, including sexual abuse and exploitation, and often faced barriers to accessing housing, education and healthcare. States needed to ensure that their migration policies were inclusive and non-discriminatory, and to challenge negative perceptions of migrants. Speakers expressed thanks to the Special Rapporteur for his work, which had contributed to strengthening the rights of migrants across the world. Bilateral, multilateral and regional cooperation and partnerships were needed to promote cooperation on protecting the human rights of migrants. Unilateral coercive measures harmed States’ capacities to host migrants, one speaker said, calling for them to be removed.

Speaking in the discussion were Libya, South Africa, Niger, Chile, Senegal, Mauritania, Afghanistan, Sudan, Marshall Islands, Holy See, Mali, Cuba, Russian Federation, Romania, Algeria, Bolivia, Thailand, Nepal, Lesotho, Mozambique, Tunisia, Ecuador, Philippines, Bahamas, Uruguay, Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, Uganda, Ukraine, Pakistan, Türkiye, Cambodia, Iran, Peru, and Oman on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council.

Also speaking were Commission nationale indépendante des droits de l’homme du Burundi, Franciscans International, Friends Worlds Committee, Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales, Asociación Civil, Federation for Women and Family Planning, Advocates for Human Rights, Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Humanists International, Anti-Slavery International, Defence for Children International, and Human Rights Watch.

At the beginning of the meeting, Vusal Huseynov, Chief of the State Migration Service and member of the Cabinet of the Government of Azerbaijan, took the floor in the discussion on migrants.

Speaking in right of reply at the end of the meeting were Azerbaijan, Belarus, Armenia and Lithuania.

The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Human Rights Council’s fifty-third regular session can be found here.

The next meeting of the Council will be at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 27 June, when it will hold an interactive dialogue with the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, followed by an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the right to education.

Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants

The interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants started in the previous meeting and a summary can be found here.

Statement by a Dignitary

VUSAL HUSEYNOV,Chief of the State Migration Service and Member of the Cabinet of the Government of Azerbaijan, said there was a critical imperative to secure the rights of each individual, regardless of their race, ethnicity or migratory status. Everyone must have dignity and security. There was a realm of pressing challenges in the realm of migration, which required a firm commitment to safeguarding the human rights of migrants. It was crucial to recognise that the protection of the fundamental rights of migrants should not take into account whether it was forced or voluntary. Safer migration pathways were essential. Targeted approaches were crucial in order to empower migrants to being able to contribute. Discussions similar to this one were important in that regard, as they provided ways to determine how to implement principles at the national level.

Upholding international norms and principles, Azerbaijan stood proudly, having established a United Nations Network on Migration at the national level, and having participated in international fora to share and express progress at dealing with the migration issue. It was also currently working on new pledges. Azerbaijan was going through a period of dynamic internal migration, following the liberation of occupied territories, which had ensured the rights of nearly one million refugees and internally displaced persons to return to their homelands, after the violation of their rights lasted for nearly 30 years. When it came to cross-border movement, Azerbaijan had also made remarkable progress, including the safeguarding of the rights of all categories of migrants and eradicating statelessness. Azerbaijan would continue to mobilise its efforts to promote a human rights-based approach to migration, putting them at the heart of dialogues, both national and international.

Discussion

Continuing the discussion, some speakers expressed concern regarding the deaths of migrants in transit. Such events were wake-up calls to promote measures for saving the lives of migrants in transit. What was happening in the Mediterranean was no accident, one speaker said, adding that the States responsible for dangerous pushbacks in this region needed to be held accountable. Migrants in transit were at high risk of exploitation. Many speakers noted an increase in migration flows in recent years, due to conflicts and environmental factors, among others.

Migration posed social, political and economic challenges for all States. Female migrants particularly risked abuse, including sexual abuse and exploitation, and often faced barriers to accessing housing, education and healthcare. Children in irregular situations also suffered greatly, experiencing the worst forms of exploitation. Further, upon return to their home countries, migrants, especially women and girls, faced difficulty finding work and obtaining livelihood. States needed to ensure that their migration policies were inclusive and non-discriminatory, and to challenge negative perceptions of migrants. States’ migration policies needed to have a gender and human rights-based approach.

Irregular migrants were vulnerable, and often could not access basic services. Some speakers expressed concern that the number of irregular migrants across the world was increasing, and that irregular migrants faced regular discrimination and marginalisation. States had an obligation to facilitate the regularisation of migrants. They needed to strive to make regularisation processes accessible and affordable. Further, measures to prevent discrimination of migrants were needed. States needed to address challenges related to the integration of migrants in society.

Speakers expressed thanks to the Special Rapporteur for his work, which had contributed to strengthening the rights of migrants across the world. The recommendations of the Special Rapporteur were useful to States with mass irregular migration. One speaker said that the mandate of the Special Rapporteur should be impartial, and not be used to threaten or make false allegations about States.

Laws on migration should be based on international law and international standards. Bilateral, multilateral and regional cooperation and partnerships were needed to promote cooperation on protecting the human rights of migrants. Unilateral coercive measures harmed States’ capacities to host migrants, one speaker said, calling for them to be removed. Speakers expressed their commitment to implementing the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. The implementation of the Global Compact needed to be bolstered through further commitment from States. Countries of origin had an obligation to their nationals. Circular agreements were needed to protect the labour rights of migrants, and strong collaboration was needed to address the root causes of migration. Some speakers expressed support for the Special Rapporteur’s call to establish an independent mechanism to investigate the abuse of migrants at and around borders.

Some speakers said that policies were needed to allow migrants to integrate into society. Migrants bolstered the economies of both their countries of origin and destination, rejuvenated workforces and contributed to social empowerment. Migration could bring positive experiences for migrants, their families and host communities. Some speakers called on States to stop tying visas to specific work areas, which limited the work and services that migrants could access and put migrants at risk of exploitation.

A number of speakers expressed their commitment to promoting safe, orderly and regular migration and to protecting the rights of migrants. They outlined measures for promoting the rights of migrants, including legislation and policies to promote the regularisation and rights of migrants and to protect them from discrimination, centres helping migrants to access services and education, bilateral and multilateral initiatives promoting safe migration pathways, ratification of international human rights treaties protecting the rights of migrants, online processing systems for migrants, and the establishment of government departments dealing with the rights of migrants domestically and abroad.

Speakers asked questions on how States could put an end to violent pushback practices and ensure that the human rights of migrants were duly considered, on the responsibilities of States of origin towards their nationals working abroad, on additional protections needed for migrants who were women or girls, on measures to encourage States that had not ratified the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families to do so, on how States could better ensure the regularisation of migrants, on how the international community could support small developing island States to deal with increasing migration flows, on how States could create structural conditions to allow migrants to prosper, on how States could combat xenophobia against migrants, on how the Council could better protect migrants in transit, and on how to prevent the use of restrictive labour migration visas.

Concluding Remarks

FELIPE GONZÁLEZ MORALES, Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, said regularisation was a key tool to protect the human rights of migrants themselves. As a stand-alone mechanism, this would not satisfy the rights of the migrant, but it was an important step, with a view to facilitating their integration into the destination society, avoiding administrative detention and arbitrary detention, and accessing services, among others. It was important to guarantee citizen participation when it came to migration policies and when it came to regularisation issues. Freedom of assembly for migrants must also be guaranteed so that they could participate in the formulation of policy. The gender dimension was crucial to bear in mind: the specific conditions endured by women in host countries must be taken into account. The best interests of the child must also be taken into account.

Mr. González Morales said the Council must keep discussing migration policies and establish strengthened monitoring mechanisms, such as the Commission that was under discussion. The Council must help ensure that States were transparent in their migration policy, that there was public access to information, and consider an independent monitoring mechanism at the level of national human rights institutions. It was important not to use euphemisms when discussing migration: any deprivation of liberty was a form of detention. There was no limbo along borders - there was a State responsible on each side, but there was no “No Man’s Land”; States were responsible for practices on their own territory, and must investigate human rights violations and ensure that perpetrators were brought to book.

At the conclusion of the dialogue, the Vice-President of the Council said that as the Special Rapporteur’s term was coming to an end, he wished to express, on behalf of the Council, its deep appreciation for the valuable contributions the Special Rapporteur had made to the work of the Council.

Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Killings

Reports

The Council has before it the report of the Special Rapporteur on extra-judicial, summary or arbitrary killings on Deaths in prisons (A/HRC/53/29), and its addendum on his Visit to Argentina (A/HRC/53/29/Add.1).

Presentation of Reports

MORRIS TIDBALL-BINZ, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, expressed thanks to the States that had cooperated with his official visits. The staff of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in the field and academics had also provided valuable support to his mandate.

Mr. Tidball-Binz expressed regret that extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions continued to be recorded throughout the world with alarming numbers of victims. These included victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity, such as massacres and indiscriminate attacks against the civilian population, whose most frequent victims were women, children and the elderly, as well as journalists and human rights defenders. Deaths in custody and femicides were prevailing at a pandemic-like level. These were often poorly investigated and silenced. The use of the death penalty was continuing in certain States.

The report examined the scandalous phenomenon of deaths in prisons. Most deaths in prisons should not have occurred. Such deaths could have been prevented with simple, easily implementable measures. However, deaths in prisons continued to occur, with vulnerable communities most often being victims. Mr. Tidball-Binz quoted Neslon Mandela, who said that “a nation should not be judged by how it treated its highest citizens, but by how it treated its lowest ones.” Urgent, specific measures were needed to prevent deaths in custody. The report contained recommendations in this regard. States had an obligation under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Vienna Declaration to prevent deaths in custody.

On his official visit to Argentina, Mr. Tidball-Binz thanked the Argentinian Government for the support it had afforded. Argentina had built a robust legislative framework for preventing arbitrary deaths and ensuring accountability for past abuses. He noticed, however, that despite achievements, there continued to be deaths at the hands of the police, with perpetrators enjoying impunity. Investigations into these deaths often did not follow international standards, and families of victims faced significant delays in receiving justice. The country lacked a unified protocol to investigate such crimes. There was still a disproportionate number of deaths due to gender-based violence. During 2022, the country counted a femicide every 35 hours. The report called for the urgent approval of a draft bill on institutional violence, and the implementation of international standards in investigations of crimes by Government officials, including through training and effective external controls. Mr. Tidball-Binz commended the Government’s receptivity to his observations and recommendations.

Statement by Country Concerned

Argentina, speaking as a country concerned, said the report was exhaustive and detailed. Argentina intended to continue its dialogue with the Special Rapporteur, recognising the challenges and reiterating its commitment to reparations. It had made great strides in bringing to trial the perpetrators of serious human rights violations, with over 1,000 persons tried and convicted of crimes against humanity. The rule on the use of firearms referred to in the report had been revoked. Argentina was committed to eradicating institutional violence: this continued to be a problem in the country. There had been the promulgation of the Constitutional Act against Institutional Violence. The State was acting as claimant in cases that were listed by the Special Rapporteur. Argentina was trying to deepen its policies and combat institutional violence through training. The Special Procedures helped members of the Council to identify and diagnose the weaknesses in their legislation, and represented an opportunity to share experiences and find different ideas for institutional improvements, legislation or public policies that could help to eradicate human rights abuses. Argentina had a very dark past, and was still working to completely eradicate institutional violence.

Discussion

In the ensuing discussion, many speakers underlined the crucial importance of preventing any form of arbitrary deprivation of life, including in prison, and the importance of ensuring accountability when such killings occur. States had the duty to investigate any potentially unlawful death promptly, effectively, thoroughly, independently, impartially and transparently. States assumed direct responsibility for the lives of individuals deprived of liberty. The relatively high rate of deaths in custody was a grim reminder that States had not been able to uphold the right to life for all. However, positive reforms from across the globe, presented in the report, showed that change was possible.

Preventing deaths was key, some speakers said. Ways to reduce the number of prisoners, for example by applying non-custodial measures, could be explored. Women should not be imprisoned for exercising their reproductive rights. The Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death must be observed. There should be more comprehensive, disaggregated and reliable data on all forms of deaths in prison. Every death in custody should be investigated, and the Minnesota Protocol be observed in the investigations. Prisoners should be treated with dignity, including after their death.

Some speakers said States should put into place innovative approaches in the justice system so as to have access to measures that replaced imprisonment. As prisoners fell under the direct responsibility of the State of detention and stood in direct relation to a State’s responsibility to uphold the right to life, any death of prisoners held in detention must be investigated in an independent and transparent manner. Moreover, it was the responsibility of States to take appropriate measures to prevent deaths in prison and to ensure that members of marginalised communities were not disproportionately affected. This included ensuring that prisons were safe and clean, their occupancy rate was respected, and that the food, water as well as access to sanitation and healthcare they received were adequate. Moreover, special attention should be paid to prisoners with disabilities, and other vulnerabilities such as age or gender-based considerations should also be taken into account.

It was vital to deal with the economic and social factors leading to criminality, which would lead to a reduction in prison overcrowding, improve dignified living conditions for detainees, and improve the ability to rehabilitate those who had completed their sentence. Human rights were universal and inherent to all. States’ responsibility also covered the mental health of detainees. Imprisonment must be the last line of defence, and not the first recourse. The aim of prisons should be to rebuild lives, not to end them, and this should be the final objective of States. It was crucial to have disaggregated updated data on prisoners, and effective systems of internal and external oversight that was frequent and periodic must be established.

A number of speakers called for the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur.

Among the questions raised were: how could data collection be improved, to make deaths in prison less invisible and ensure better-informed policies to prevent and investigate them; a request for the Special Rapporteur to elaborate why it was so important for States to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; could the Special Rapporteur share good practices that could strengthen the protection of human rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and other persons who were deprived of freedom; could the Special Rapporteur elaborate on his recommendation that prisoners must not be asked to undertake activities that put their lives at risk; had the Special Rapporteur picked up on cases of extrajudicial execution in places of deprivation of freedom where children were detained with adults, and what were the results on those children who were treated as adults?

Intermediary Remarks

MORRIS TIDBALL-BINZ, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said that in 2019, the Human Rights Council recommended that States set up data collection systems on deaths of detainees. An effective measure was still not up and running. It was known that there were victims in their thousands, but the exact figure was not known. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime was working on monitoring systems, but to date they remained insufficient. It was clear that the system needed to be improved. The International Database of Crime allowed for the breakdown of data regarding violent deaths in prison. This platform did not list the reasons of “natural” deaths, which in some cases resulted from lack of food or health care. The World Health Organization offered more data on causes of death in its databases, but did not take into account structural failures. A suitable system needed to be developed to make data on deaths in custody useful. Investigation into deaths in custody was typically not compulsory. Mr. Tidball-Binz called on all States to compulsorily and properly investigate deaths in custody, which allowed for the design of measures to prevent the recurrence of such deaths.

Visits and inspections of places of detention carried out by properly resourced agencies had direct measurable value in preventing deaths in custody. The report called for States to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and implement mechanisms of this nature.

South-South cooperation was important. Countries of the Global South had achieved significant results in preventing deaths in custody with limited resources. There were opportunities to further leverage South-South cooperation. There were good practices across the world that provided all States with guidance on how to improve their situation and reduce deaths in custody.

Discussion

In the continuing discussion, some speakers said the human rights of persons in detention, including their right to life, must be protected at all times, and any deaths must be investigated thoroughly, and the causes addressed. Conditions in prisons must be in line with human rights standards. All States must ensure that unlawful deaths were effectively investigated and prosecuted. The right to life was the minimum that States must achieve; rebuilding lives was the ultimate goal. However, the structure of the prison system as it stood was far from that goal.

The recommendations made in the report needed to be heeded; among these were that prison administrations must protect the rights and welfare of prisoners and prison staff; prison governance must be competent and consistent with the rule of law and human rights; ensuring the dignity and welfare of the prisoner must be the paramount concern; and the human rights of prison staff must be respected.

When investigating prison-related deaths, the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016) must be observed; all those involved in investigating deaths in prison, especially prison staff, police and/or other investigators and forensic doctors, must be familiar with, and comply with, the Minnesota Protocol.

Prisoners in United Nations-recognised disputed territories required equal attention, if not more, a speaker said, noting that prisoners in such situations were often victims of torture and custodial deaths at the hands of occupying authorities, who may be operating with impunity and no accountability. The Special Rapporteur should pay immediate attention to such situations and call for an immediate halt to outrageous human rights violations, including extrajudicial, summary executions and custodial deaths, the speaker urged.

A reduction of the use of preventive detention and of prolonged periods in preventive detention for minor infractions, as addressed in the report, was supported by several speakers, who called for measures for social reintegration and re-training. Apostasy should not lead to criminal responsibility, and yet when decisions were made, they should take into account the cultural context. Relaxation of legislation should not lead to the legalisation of drugs. Over-crowding contributed significantly to deaths in prisons and disaggregated data must be collected in order to protect the lives of all prisoners: less than half of countries published data on prisons, and this was often lacking. All Member States should support the implementation of the recommendations set out in the report.

The right to health was a key element in the protection of the rights of the imprisoned, as prisons and detention centres were key centres for the spread of contagious diseases. People deprived of liberty continued to be under-served by health services. The lack of disaggregated data on drug-related deaths in prisons led to a lack of adequate services as well as to a violation of the rights of their families. Medical neglect remained a fact in too many countries. State members should ensure cooperation between all stakeholders, including the judicial administration, penitential administration and civil society, ensuring that judicial guarantees were implemented and respected.

Among questions raised were: what were the key steps that all States must undertake to protect the right to life in prisons; how should the issue of torture and ill-treatment in the Guantanamo Bay detention facility be dealt with; what reparations could be made to the families of victims of custodial deaths; and in contexts where there was no avenue for victims and their families to turn to, how could existing mechanisms effectively prevent and guarantee full, transparent investigations into violations of the most sacred of rights - the right to life.

Concluding Remarks

MORRIS TIDBALL-BINZ, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said that States should implement the recommendations within his report to prevent deaths in custody and make real the vision on Edmund Cumming, a lawyer from South Africa. Mr. Tidball-Binz offered his support to States in this regard.Link: https://www.ungeneva.org/en/news-media/meeting-summary/2023/06/les-deces-en-detention-sont-une-tragedie-mondiale-inacceptable