AFTERNOON

29 September 2011

Recommends that General Assembly Lifts Suspension of Libya’s Membership Rights in the Human Rights Council, Extends Mandate of Rapporteur on Hazardous Wastes

The Human Rights Council this afternoon adopted 13 resolutions including on technical assistance and capacity building for Sudan, South Sudan and Yemen. On Libya, the Council recommended that the General Assembly lift the suspension of Libya’s membership in the Human Rights Council. The Council also extended the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on hazardous wastes, giving him a new title as Special Rapporteur on human rights obligations related to environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes.

Other texts that the Council adopted concerned holding a panel discussion on freedom of expression on the Internet; issues related to terrorist hostage-taking; human rights in the administration of justice, in particular juvenile justice; the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights; regional arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights; the incompatibility between democracy and racism; the enhancement of technical cooperation and capacity-building in the field of human rights; and multiculturalism as a means of protecting human rights and combating xenophobia, discrimination and intolerance.

With regard to technical assistance for the Sudan in the field of human rights, the Council commended the cooperation extended by the Government of the Sudan to the Independent Expert and to the United Nations and African Union missions in the Sudan in the field of human rights and international humanitarian law. The Council noted the humanitarian situation in the provinces of South Kordofan and Blue Nile, and called upon all parties to make every effort to immediately end violence and halt clashes. Furthermore the Council urged the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide the Sudan with the necessary technical support and training and renewed for a period of one year the mandate of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in the Sudan.

Concerning technical assistance and capacity-building for South Sudan in the field of human rights, the Council called upon the Government of South Sudan to strengthen ongoing cooperation with the United Nations Mission in South Sudan on issues pertaining to human rights. The Council invited the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to identify and assess areas of assistance and to assist South Sudan with appropriate technical assistance if requested, and called upon the States Members of the United Nations in the framework of international cooperation, relevant United Nations agencies and international financial institutions to provide the Government of South Sudan, upon its request, with appropriate technical assistance and capacity-building to promote respect for human rights.

Regarding technical assistance and capacity-building to Yemen in the field of human rights, the Council called upon the Government of Yemen and the other parties to address the recommendations in the report of the High Commissioner and condemned all violations of human rights in Yemen by all parties and called upon all parties to move forward with negotiations on an inclusive, orderly and Yemen-led process of political transition on the basis of the Gulf Cooperation Council’s initiative. The Council requested the Office of the High Commissioner to coordinate with donors on ways to assist the Government of Yemen and non-governmental organizations with capacity-building for the establishment of a national human rights institution and requested the Office of the High Commissioner to present a progress report on the situation of human rights in Yemen, and the follow-up on the present resolution, to the Human Rights Council at its nineteenth session.

In a resolution regarding the resumption of Libya's membership in the Human Rights Council, the Council welcomed the commitments made by Libya to uphold its obligations under international human rights law, to promote and protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law and cooperation with relevant international human rights mechanisms including the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the International Commission of Inquiry established by Human Rights Council resolution S-15/1. The Council recommended that the General Assembly lift the suspension of Libya’s membership rights in the Human Rights Council at its current session.

Concerning the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights obligations related to environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, the Council decided to extend the mandate, with the new title of Special Rapporteur on the human rights obligations related to environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, for a further period of three years, and called upon countries to facilitate the work of the Special Rapporteur by providing information and inviting him to undertake country visits.

The Council also adopted a resolution on convening at its nineteenth session a panel discussion on the promotion and protection of freedom of expression on the Internet, with a particular focus on the ways and means to improve its protection in accordance with international human rights law. On human rights and issues related to terrorist hostage-taking, the Council requested the Advisory Committee to prepare a study focusing in particular on how hostage-taking by terrorist groups posed challenges and had an adverse impact not only for the protection of the human rights of hostages but also for the protection and enjoyment of those rights of those living within local communities. The Council also decided to convene at its twentieth session a panel discussion on the promotion of multiculturalism as a means of protecting human rights and combating xenophobia, discrimination and intolerance.

Resolutions were also adopted on human rights in the administration of justice, in particular juvenile justice; the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights; regional arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights; the incompatibility between democracy and racism; and technical cooperation and capacity-building in the field of human rights.

Introducing resolutions were Libya, Sweden, Senegal introducing on behalf of the African Group, Austria, Ukraine, Belgium, Uruguay speaking on behalf of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), Thailand, Yemen and Egypt.

Speaking in general comments were Cuba, Ecuador, Uruguay, Maldives, Kuwait, China, Poland speaking on behalf of the European Union, United States, Brazil, Costa Rica, United States, Sudan, South Sudan, Morocco, Norway, Senegal speaking on behalf of the African Group and Saudi Arabia.

Speaking in explanations of the vote before or after the vote were Italy, United States and Poland speaking on behalf of the European Union.

The Council will resume its work at 10 a.m. on Friday, 30 September 2011, when it will continue to take action on remaining draft resolutions and decisions before it concludes its eighteenth session.

Action on Resolution Under Agenda Item on Organizational and Procedural Matters

Action on Resolution on Resumption of Libya’s Membership in the Human Rights Council

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L35) regarding the resumption of Libya's membership in the Human Rights Council, adopted without a vote, the Council welcomes the commitments made by Libya to uphold its obligations under international human rights law, to promote and protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law, and to cooperate with relevant international human rights mechanisms including the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the International Commission of Inquiry established by Human Rights Council resolution S-15/1; recommends to the General Assembly to lift the suspension of Libya’s membership rights in the Human Rights Council at its current session.

IBRAHIM ALDREDI (Libya), introducing the resolution, asked the Council to lift the suspension of Libya from the Human Rights Council. Libya would be working actively to ensure the protection of human rights and prevent abuses of human rights. There were 43 additional co-sponsors.

RODOLFO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.35, took note of the proposal on this subject and noted that Cuba had never been part in the suspension of rights of membership of any State. Cuba had never prevented any country from participating in a multilateral body. A group of Western countries had been particularly active in this area, while during the era of apartheid they had never prevented such a regime from participating. Concerning the authorities now in Libya, Cuba’s position had been clearly presented by its Foreign Ministry. Cuba hoped that the Libyan people would be able to enjoy their self-determination and freely choose their political and social system without the intervention of military forces and meddling in domestic affairs by the powers of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization through indiscriminate bombings.

ALFONSO MORALES (Ecuador), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.35, said the international community had tried to prevent the Libyan people from controlling their own right to self-determination and to control their territory. Ecuador was against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s military action in Libya and stressed that only a negotiated process would bring about a comprehensive peace settlement so that the Libyan people would be able to maintain their sovereignty over their natural resources and territory. Ecuador called on the Human Rights Council to investigate the alleged human rights crimes and violations perpetuated in Libya by all parties without impunity. Human rights were universal and should be fully complied with in a universal way.

FEDERICO PERAZZA (Uruguay), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.35, said Uruguay welcomed the cooperation of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights with the Transitional National Government of Libya. The fact that Uruguay co-sponsored this resolution did not change the position of the Government of Uruguay on recognition of the new authorities in Libya. Uruguay hoped Libya would be able to respond to the recommendations made during its Universal Periodic Review. Uruguay would encourage Libya to seek technical assistance from the international community

IRUTHISHAM ADAM (Maldives), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.35, said that the Maldives was pleased to co-sponsor the draft resolution. The Maldives supported the draft resolution for three reasons. It had been the Council as the principal body of the United Nations dealing with human rights, which took the initiative in suspending Libya. However, as the report of the Commission of Inquiry had indicated, the situation in the country had changed dramatically, including the attitude of the new regime concerning its human rights commitments. While challenges in the human rights situation remained, it was important for Libya’s suspension to be removed so that the African Group could regain its full membership in the Council. Members elected to the Council should uphold human rights standards and the Maldives believed that Libya would rejoin the international community in the promotion and protection of human rights and fulfill its commitments.

LAURA MIRACHIAN (Italy), speaking in an explanation of the vote after the vote, said Italy welcomed the decision of the United Nations General Assembly to recognize the Transitional Council of Libya as the legitimate representatives of the country. Italy stated its support for this resolution. The new leadership of Libya should fully respect its international human rights commitments.

DHARAR ABDUL-RAZZAK RAZZOOQI (Kuwait) drew the attention of the secretariat to resolution L.35, saying that operative paragraph 2 in the Arabic text did not match the same language in the English text.

Action on Resolutions Under Agenda Item on the Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Including the Right to Development

Action on Resolution on Panel on Freedom of Expression on the Internet

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L27) regarding the panel on freedom of expression on the internet, adopted without a vote, the Council decides to convene, within existing resources, at its nineteenth session, a panel discussion on the promotion and protection of freedom of expression on the Internet, with a particular focus on the ways and means to improve its protection in accordance with international human rights law; requests the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to liaise with relevant special procedures, States and other stakeholders, including relevant United Nations bodies and agencies, with a view to ensuring multi-stakeholder participation in the panel discussion; also requests the Office of the High Commissioner to prepare a report on the outcome of the panel discussion in the form of a summary.

JAN KNUTSSON (Sweden) speaking in introduction of draft resolution L.27, said the L.27 had 57 co-sponsors. During the last Human Rights Council session in June, Sweden was encouraged by the broad expression of support on this issue. The resolution was also a follow-up to the report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression. The resolution proposed a panel on freedom of expression on the Internet. The panel would be a place for delegations to express their opinions in an open manner. Sweden hoped that delegations would express support for the resolution today.

HE YAFEI (China), speaking in a general comment on draft decision L.27, said that properly handling differences in human rights required constructive dialogue and cooperation. China had participated in the consultations on this draft decision and had contributed with proposals. Many delegations welcomed China’s views in order to make the proposal clearer. However, the major co-sponsors of this draft had refused to accept suggestions from China and other countries. China expressed dissatisfaction with the confrontational approach in these practices, which had reflected the prejudice and narrow-mindedness concerning the field of human rights and would affect the credibility of the Council. For this reason, China would not join the consensus.

RODOLFO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.27, said that the Chinese proposal had the advantage of being a text on a subject that would become a common heritage to mankind, the Internet, while at the same time the proposal would help the Council to discuss important concerns. The Internet was a sphere where one needed to arrive at a fair world order but it was currently controlled like it was the private property of the United States. The United States had put themselves as the champions of the Internet but then when Wiki-leaks appeared, they turned an about face. Clearly there were motivations of attacking someone who enjoyed freedom of expression on Wiki-leaks. The United States had imposed an anti-democratic order of control over the Internet to create disorder in other places. Cuba hoped that the democratically organized panel would be invited to talk about the real events in the world without being captured by the ideas of a group of delegates who were pursuing ideas of world domination.

Action on Resolution on Human Rights and Issues Related to Terrorist Hostage-Taking

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L.3) regarding human rights and issues related to terrorist hostage-taking, adopted without a vote as orally revised, the Council notes with appreciation the holding of a panel discussion on the issue of human rights in the context of action taken to address terrorist hostage-taking by the Human Rights Council at its sixteenth session; reaffirms that all acts of terrorism, including acts of hostage-taking, are a serious crime aimed at the destruction of human rights and are, under any circumstances, unjustifiable; recognizes that the issue of hostage-taking by terrorist groups poses a number of challenges and has an adverse impact not only for the protection of the human rights of hostages but also for the protection and enjoyment of these rights by those living within local communities, including in terms of socio-economic impact and development, in the countries of the regions affected by this scourge; requests the Advisory Committee to prepare a study on the issue described above; encourages the Advisory Committee when elaborating such a study to take into account, as appropriate, the work done on the issue by competent United Nations bodies and mechanisms; and requests the Advisory Committee to present an updated report on the study to the Human Rights Council at its twenty-first session.

CHEIKH TIDIANE THIAM (Senegal), speaking on behalf of the African Group in introduction of resolution L.3 as orally revised, said that the Council had previously decided to hold a panel on an area of human rights which was often underestimated and that was often approached only from the security point of view, that of human rights in the context of hostage taking. In recent years some regions had become the arena of hostage taking by terrorist groups. This phenomenon had expanded, including the amount of money requested for the release of hostages. If terrorism had become embedded in the region, this was because of the income derived from kidnapping, which could be conceived as a new form of trafficking in human beings; in terms of the capacity of terrorist groups to cause harm to victims taken hostage; and on the traditional structures of nomadic societies and given the vulnerability of young people attracted to the idea of profiting from these activities. The African Group believed that the Council should focus on the human rights situation resulting from this situation and expressed its concern about it. The draft decision entrusted the Advisory Committee to address this thematic area of work with the task of conducting a study to analyze the impact of hostage taking on the human rights of victims and local communities in regions affected by this scourge. The process of consultations on this draft had included informal and bilateral consultations and the oral revisions reflected the consensus. The African Group had spared no efforts to take into account the concerns by various delegations and invited the Council to adopt the draft resolution as orally revised by consensus.

EILEEN CHAMBERLAIN DONAHOE (United States), speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote on draft resolution L.3, thanked Algeria for its close cooperation and time invested in working through this resolution. The United States remained concerned that work relating to terrorist issues should be dealt with at the 1267 Committee and the Counter-Terrorism Committee at the United Nations Security Council. The United States believed that the payment of ransom and other concessions to terrorists were issues of critical importance in the fight against terrorists and their access to sources of finance and the United States would engage in constructive efforts to end these actions in the appropriate fora. The United States would join consensus on this informed by the views it had expressed.

Action on Resolution on Mandate of Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Obligations Related to Disposal of Hazardous Substances and Waste

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L6) regarding Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, adopted without a vote as orally revised, the Council decides to extend the mandate, with the new title of Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, for a further period of three years; requests the Special Rapporteur to continue to include in his report to the Human Rights Council comprehensive information on the adverse effects that the improper management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes may have on the enjoyment of human rights, which may include information on: (a) human rights issues related to transnational corporations and other business enterprises regarding environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes; (b) the question of rehabilitation of and assistance to victims of human rights violations related to the management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes; (d) the human rights implications of waste-recycling, the transfer of industries, industrial activities and technologies from one country to another one and their new trends, including e-wastes and dismantling of ships; (e) the question of the ambiguities in international instruments that allow the movement and dumping of hazardous substances and waste; and calls upon countries to facilitate the work of the Special Rapporteur by providing information and inviting him to undertake country visits.

CHEIKH TIDIANE THIAM (Senegal) speaking on behalf of the African Group in introduction of draft resolution L.6, said that the resolution was on the human rights applications of environmentally sound management as well as the disposable of hazardous substances and waste. Since the founding of the mandate in 1995, the various mandate holders had made significant contributions in this field and this resolution aimed at strengthening the Special Rapporteur’s mandate on the human rights implications of the management of hazardous substances and waste and to provide for on the ground assessments by the mandate holder. The African Group urged the Council to adopt the resolution by consensus.

ALEKSANDRA WOJTYLAK (Poland), speaking on behalf of the European Union in a general comment, expressed support for the renewal of this mandate with a new title. The European Union was aware of the importance of this mandate and thanked the African Group for the open and constructive spirit during the negotiations on this text. The European Union appreciated that the mandate would be more focused on human rights. The European Union had placed on record its overall position on this mandate at previous sessions and this position had not changed. In addition the European Union was concerned that this mandate may receive funding over and above the standard mandate renewals and called on the main sponsors and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to ensure that additional costs would be kept to a minimum and wished the Special Rapporteur success in fulfilling his mandate.

EILEEN CHAMBERLAIN DONAHOE (United States), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.6, said improper management of toxic waste may have impacts on human rights and so the United States joined consensus on the resolution. The United States commended Costa Rica in the significant efforts made to reach consensus, especially in adjusting the mandate holder’s title. The United States indicated general issues of concern in placing environmental factors in the human rights context. The United States was concerned about the mention of movement of toxic waste. The United States understood this to mean uncontrolled and illegal movement. Consistent with the preamble, the United States urged the Special Rapporteur to avoid overlap with other United Nations mechanism and international entities and interpreting environmental treaties beyond his authority and mandate. At the next session the United States asked the Human Rights Council to consider whether the work of this Special Rapporteur, that would at that point have been going on for 20 years, would have been completed.

Action on Resolution on Human Rights in the Administration of Justice, in Particular Juvenile Justice

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L.9) regarding human rights in the administration of justice, in particular juvenile justice, adopted without a vote, the Council stresses the importance of including rehabilitation and reintegration strategies for former child offenders in juvenile justice policies, in particular through education programmes, with a view to their assuming a constructive role in society; encourages States not to set the minimum age of criminal responsibility at too low an age level, bearing in mind the emotional, mental and intellectual maturity of the child, and, in this respect, refers to the recommendation of the Committee of the Rights of the Child to increase their lower minimum age of criminal responsibility without exception to the age of 12 years as the absolute minimum age, and to continue to increase it to a higher age level; urges States to ensure that neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without the possibility of release is imposed for offences committed by persons under 18 years of age; calls upon States to enact or review legislation to ensure that any conduct not considered a criminal offence or not penalized if committed by an adult is not considered a criminal offence and not penalized if committed by a child, in order to prevent the child’s stigmatization, victimization and criminalization; urges States to take all appropriate measures so that children who are victims of human trafficking are not subject to criminal sanctions for their involvement in unlawful activities to the extent that such involvement is a direct consequence of their situation as trafficked persons; calls upon States to consider establishing independent national or subnational mechanisms to contribute to monitoring and safeguarding the rights of children, including children within their criminal justice systems, and to address children’s concerns; stresses the importance of paying greater attention to the impact of the imprisonment of parents on their children; urges States to take all necessary and effective measures, including legal reform where appropriate, to prevent and respond to all forms of violence against children within the justice system; requests the High Commissioner to submit an analytical report to the Human Rights Council at its twenty-first session on the protection of human rights of juveniles deprived of their liberty; and decides to continue its consideration of this issue under the same agenda item in accordance with its annual programme of work.

CHRISTIAN STROHAL (Austria), introducing draft resolution L.9, underlined that this really concerned a centrepiece of human rights protection. It was at the core of States’ responsibility to ensure the rule of law in the context of legal proceedings, in accordance to the law. It was the duty of States to protect people under their custody and in the legal system, this built on a number of resolutions introduced by Austria to the Council and the General Assembly. The draft also strengthened the juvenile focus, including issues of children and young people deprived from their liberty, including collaboration between social and judicial services and the introduction of monitoring mechanisms. Austria had also requested the Office of the High Commissioner to produce an analytical report and to collaborate with UNODC in this regard. Austria was confident that delegations would join in the adoption of this draft without a vote.

Action on Resolution on the Role of Prevention in the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L21) regarding the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights, amended and adopted without a vote, the Council stresses that States should promote supportive and enabling environments for the prevention of human rights violations, including by:(a) considering ratifying international human rights conventions and covenants and fully implementing those to which they are party; (c) developing good governance, democratic systems, the rule of law and accountability; (e) addressing all forms of discrimination, as well as factors, inter alia, inequality and poverty, that may lead to situations in which human rights violations are committed; (f) promoting a free and active civil society; (g) promoting freedom of expression; (h) ensuring, where they exist, strong and independent national human rights institutions; (i) promoting human rights education and training, in particular for State actors; (j) ensuring an independent and functioning judiciary; (k) fighting corruption; acknowledges that the Human Rights Council shall contribute towards the prevention of human rights violations and respond promptly to human rights emergencies; welcomes the submission of the report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Workshop on the Role of Prevention in the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and encourages the Office of the High Commissioner to prepare a practical toolkit to support stakeholders in understanding the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights.

MYKOLA MAIMESKUL (Ukraine), speaking in an introduction of draft resolution L.21, said that the resolution was on the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights. Ukraine thanked the 40 delegations who co-sponsored this resolution, whose prime objective was to draw attention to preventive policies, strategies and measures to avoid violations of human rights at both the regional and national levels of Governments and among non-governmental stakeholders. Prevention required both political will and resources. Genuine, effective and long-lasting preventive measures would act as an alternative to human rights violations. In recognizing the prime responsibility of States in the prevention of human rights violations, the draft contained a request for the preparation of a further tool kit to understand the role of prevention in the protection and promotion of human rights that could be used by national human rights institutions. There were some concerns about the text and as a result there were two oral revisions circulated in written form and included.

Action on Resolution on Regional Arrangements for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L29/Rev.1) regarding regional arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights, amended and adopted without a vote, the Council welcomes the progress made by Governments in the establishment of regional and sub-regional arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights; expresses its appreciation for the interregional efforts made by Member States of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, as manifested by the establishment of the Independent Permanent Human Rights Commission; requests the High Commissioner to hold, in 2012, a workshop on regional arrangements for the promotion and protection of human rights to take stock of developments since the workshop in 2010, and to organize a thematic discussion based on the concrete and practical experience of regional mechanisms; also requests the High Commissioner to present to the Human Rights Council, at its twenty-second session, a report on the discussions held at the above-mentioned workshop and on the progress towards the implementation of the present resolution.

YANNICK MINSIER (Belgium), introducing draft resolution L.29/Rev.1, said this was the third time this resolution had been introduced under the regional arrangements of the Council. The objective behind the initiative concerned the need for good cooperation in the work of the Council. International and regional mechanisms for the protection of human rights had to work together and promote good practices to better protect human rights on the ground. This exercise could take the form of a seminar organized under the auspices of the High Commissioner. Belgium thanked delegations for their constructive participation during the consultations and those delegations which had already co-sponsored the resolution, including Senegal, Thailand, Armenia and Mexico for their support. Belgium hoped that the initiative would be adopted by consensus.
Action on Resolution Under the Agenda Item on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance
Action of Resolution on Incompatibility Between Democracy and Racism
In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L20) regarding the incompatibility between democracy and racism, adopted without a vote, the Council reaffirms that racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance condoned by governmental policies violate human rights and may endanger international peace and security and the harmony of persons living side by side within the same State; also reaffirms that any form of impunity condoned by public authorities for crimes motivated by racist and xenophobic attitudes plays a role in weakening the rule of law and democracy; emphasizes that transparent, accountable and participatory governance responsive to the needs and aspirations of the people, and respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law are essential for the effective prevention and elimination of racism and related intolerance; also emphasizes that the elimination of all forms of discrimination, the promotion and protection of rights of indigenous peoples and the respect for ethnic, cultural and religious diversity contribute to strengthening and promoting democracy and political participation; condemns political platforms and organizations, as well as legislation based on racism, xenophobia or doctrines of racial superiority; encourages States to consider developing awareness-raising and education campaigns with a view to combating discrimination and intolerance; stresses the need to implement fully obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination as the principal convention in the fight against racism; takes note of the report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

FEDERICO PERAZZA (Uruguay), speaking on behalf of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) in introduction of draft resolution L.20, said the resolution was intended to combat the rise of racist behaviour. There was broad support for the incompatibility of democracy with racism. Uruguay had learned from past experience the impact of such policies. All agreed on the need and importance of remaining ever vigilant. The resolution had a broad approach that did not single out any political or regional group. Uruguay had carried out three informal consultations with a view to the incorporation of many suggestions.

MARIA NAZARETH FARANI AZEVEDO (Brazil), speaking in a general comment, said that Brazil used to introduce the resolution on the incompatibility between democracy and racism to the Human Rights Commission and was now honoured that this initiative was presented by the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) and associated States, which attested to their firm commitment to combat racism and discrimination and promote democracy in the region. The international community in Durban had reiterated that democracy was incompatible with the persistence of racism and discrimination. Brazil was pleased to see that even countries which were not able to join the Durban consensus were able to support this resolution. Combating manifestations of racism and racial discrimination was not only a moral imperative but a legal obligation. The celebration of the Year of People of African Descent was important for Brazil. Finally Brazil expressed appreciation for MERCOSUR and associated States and the co-sponsors for supporting the resolution.

CHRISTIAN GUILLERMET-FERNANDEZ (Costa Rica), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.20, said Costa Rica was also a co-sponsor of this resolution and noted that this resolution was an historic effort because of its broad approach and its background in the Council. Costa Rica noted operative paragraph 11 which provided guidelines for Member States.

EILEEN CHAMBERLAIN DONAHOE (United States), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.20, said the United States was committed to working with its global partners to combat racism. The United States appreciated the reference in the resolution that government endorsement of racist polices and such as apartheid or Jim Crow laws were a threat to the heart of democracy.

Action on Resolutions Under Agenda Item on Technical Assistance and capacity Building

Action on Resolution on Technical Assistance for the Sudan in the Field of Human Rights

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L.4 Rev.1) regarding technical assistance for the Sudan in the field of human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council takes note of the report of the independent expert on the situation of human rights in the Sudan and the addendum thereto, submitted to the Human Rights Council at its eighteenth session; commends the cooperation extended by the Government of the Sudan to the independent expert and to the United Nations and African Union missions in the Sudan in the field of human rights and international humanitarian law; commends the efforts made by the Government of the Sudan in completing the implementation process of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, and appreciates the genuine role played by the Government in holding the historic referendum of the self-determination for South Sudan and urges all parties to continue their efforts to implement the remaining obligations stipulated in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement; notes with concern the humanitarian situation in the provinces of South Kordofan and Blue Nile, and calls upon all parties to make every effort to immediately end violence and halt clashes, and to take action to strengthen the respect of the rule of law in these two provinces, and to respect all human rights and fundamental freedoms; requests Member States, relevant United Nations agencies and stakeholders to support the national efforts of the Government of the Sudan with a view to further improving the human rights situation in the country, and to respond to its requests for technical assistance; urges the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide the Sudan with the necessary technical support and training; decides to renew for a period of one year the mandate of the independent expert on the situation of human rights in the Sudan, requests the independent expert to submit a report to the Human Rights Council for consideration at its twenty-first session, and requests the Secretary-General to provide the independent expert with all assistance necessary to discharge his mandate fully.

CHEIKH TIDIANE THIAM (Senegal), introducing draft resolution L.4/Rev.1 on behalf of the African Group, said that the draft resolution which had been submitted stressed the positive developments in Sudan, including the holding of a referendum and the efforts to protect human rights. The cooperation of the Government of Sudan with the United Nations and the Independent Expert had also been highlighted in the text. The resolution also noted the signing of a peace agreement in Doha, and urged stakeholders to sign the text without delay. Concerning the humanitarian situation in South Kordofan and the Blue Nile regions, the resolution appealed to all sides to end violence and to take measures to strengthen respect for the rule of law and human rights and fundamental freedoms. The same operative paragraph explicitly mentioned humanitarian access, taking into account observations made during consultations on this draft resolution. With regards to the substantive proposal contained in paragraph 11 concerning the extension of the Independent Expert on Sudan for another year, the African Group thanked all States which agreed to support and delegations which actively participated in the consultation. The adoption by consensus would reflect the commitment on the part of the Council on the subject.

ABDELRAHMAN DHIRAR (Sudan), speaking as a concerned country on draft resolution L.4, thanked all the countries which worked to reach a consensus. This had come after many sessions, thanks in particular to the United States that was keen to reach this consensus, and the Arab and African Groups that worked hard on it. The principal position of Sudan was the need for it to be taken out of the countries assigned Special Procedures under human rights situations that require the Council’s attention. The continued presence of Sudan in this list was not enhancing the cause of human rights in Sudan. There was a feeling that Sudan was being singularly targeted and this was not based on a just assessment. This was not helping the human rights situation in Sudan. The Government was committed to work with the Independent Expert and had engaged in an interactive dialogue that resulted in this resolution. The transfer of the situation in Sudan from item 4 on human rights situations that require the Council’s attention to item 10 on technical assistance and capacity building would lead to further efforts for the protection and promotion of human rights in Sudan. The renewal of the role of the Independent Expert was welcomed by the Government of Sudan. Sudan assured him if its assistance. Sudan wished to refer to an amendment in paragraph 8 after there had been agreement to delete the word “serious”.

ALEKSANDRA WOJTYLAK (Poland), speaking on behalf of the European Union in an explanation of the vote before the vote on draft resolution L.4, said the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms remained a challenge for Sudan and the international community should not disengage at this moment. Although the European Union supported this resolution, which provided for continued engagement of the Special Rapporteur with Sudan, there were a number of important elements lacking in the resolution, for example that the Council should have taken greater recognition of the human rights violations on the ground and used stronger language in its communications to Sudan, notably about the human rights violations in the Blue Nile and South Kordofan. The European Union said it understood that the Special Rapporteur would continue to engage on the challenges faced on the ground in Sudan and it was imperative that there was no protection gap from this Council at this time.

Action on Resolution on Technical Assistance and Capacity Building to South Sudan in the Field of Human Rights

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L.5/Rev.1) regarding Technical assistance and capacity-building for South Sudan in the field of human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council welcomes the establishment of the Republic of South Sudan on 9 July 2011 as an independent State; welcomes the commitments made by the Government of South Sudan to strengthen national mechanisms of protection and promotion of human rights; calls upon the Government of South Sudan to strengthen ongoing cooperation with the United Nations Mission in South Sudan on issues pertaining to human rights, and calls upon all parties to make every effort to prevent violence; encourages the international community to increase its technical and financial assistance for the Government of South Sudan to support its efforts to promote and protect human rights; invites the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights to identify and assess in collaboration with the Government of South Sudan, areas of assistance; and upon its request, assist the Government in its efforts to promote respect for human rights; calls upon the States Members of the United Nations in the framework of international cooperation, relevant United Nations agencies and international financial institutions to provide the Government of South Sudan, upon its request, with appropriate technical assistance and capacity-building to promote respect for human rights.

CHEIKH TIDIANE THIAM (Senegal), on behalf of the African Group in introduction of resolution L.5/Rev.1, said that the draft resolution as orally revised welcomed the independence of the Republic of South Sudan and its membership to the United Nations. The resolution welcomed the engagement of the new State of South Sudan to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms; and in order to achieve this objective, the Government of South Sudan through this draft resolution, would reiterate its will to reinforce national mechanisms for the protection and promotion of these rights. The text called on the Government to step up on its cooperation with the United Nations in South Sudan in the field of human rights and called on the international community to increase its technical and support. The resolution requested the High Commissioner to send an evaluation team to assess needs and define the areas requiring assistance and to support the Government in its request to promote and protect human rights and to submit a report on the implementation of the resolution during the twenty-first session of the Council. The African Group thanked delegations for their constructive participation in the resolution and was heartened by the fact that a number of States had become co-sponsors.

ALEKSANDRA WOJTYLAK (Poland), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.5/Rev.1 on behalf of the European Union, welcomed the cooperative role of the Government of South Sudan. The Human Rights Council needed to be supportive when a new State engaged with it on issues of technical and capacity building. The European Union called on States to provide technical assistance and capacity building. In view of identifying and assessing areas of assistance, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights could make recommendations and investigations, for example by an assessment mission. Poland remained concerned about the challenges identified in the report of the Independent Expert. The European Union fully supported this resolution.

The Representative of South Sudan, speaking as a concerned country, said South Sudan reiterated its commitment to promote and protect human rights and was willing to cooperate with the international community in all areas of human rights. The Government of South Sudan was focused on legal reform and required capacity building and technical assistance in the field of human rights. The Government of South Sudan had worked to foster ways to develop pluralism and to protect and promote human rights. Although South Sudan had yet to adopt many of the human rights treaties, it had articulated in its Constitution some provisions of these treaties, such as the Convention Against all Forms of Discrimination against Women. Sudan expressed its willingness to cooperate with the Human Rights Council and all international bodies for the promotion and protection of human rights for all its citizens.

Action on Resolution on the Enhancement of Technical Cooperation and Capacity Building in the Field of Human Rights

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L24/Rev.1) regarding the enhancement of technical cooperation and capacity-building in the field of human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council reaffirms that States have the primary responsibility for the promotion and protection of all human rights; decides to dedicate, once a year, a part of its programme of work under agenda item 10 to a thematic discussion to promote the sharing of experiences and best practices in the promotion and protection of human rights; also decides that the theme of the discussion shall be approved by the Human Rights Council on an annual basis, and that the first discussion to be held at the nineteenth session of the Council shall be based on the theme “Sharing of best practices and promoting technical cooperation: paving the way towards the second cycle of the universal periodic review”; requests the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to liaise with States and relevant stakeholders, including those involved in technical cooperation projects that demonstrate best practices on the ground; encourages the Office to make available to the public information on:(a) technical assistance and capacity-building provided by the Office and other United Nations agencies to States in the implementation of their human rights obligations and commitments, including their accepted universal periodic review recommendations; (c) areas of technical assistance where more resources are needed; invites the High Commissioner to make an annual presentation on the best practices and challenges in technical assistance and capacity-building efforts, starting from the twentieth session of the Council; encourages Members and observers of the Human Rights Council to use the general debate under agenda item 10 as a platform to share best practices on assistance needed in the implementation of their human rights obligations and voluntary pledges and commitments, including accepted universal periodic review recommendations; encourages special procedures mandate holders, in their interaction with States, to share information of their knowledge relating to best practices and the possibility of technical assistance in the promotion and protection of human rights in the area of their mandates.

SIHASAK PHUANGKETKEOW (Thailand), introducing draft resolution L.24/Rev.1, said that the main objectives of the draft resolution were to allow the Council to better fulfill its mandate to promote technical cooperation and capacity building by strengthening partnership, ensuring better coordination, and promoting the sharing of experiences and best practices in the promotion and protection of human rights; and, secondly, to make the discussion under agenda item 10 more focused and to allow more countries to engage in and benefit from the discussion in order to enhance the spirit of dialogue and cooperation within the Council. The draft resolution envisaged an annual thematic discussion within the framework of agenda item 10; to make the general debate more focused, the resolution requested the High Commissioner to make an annual presentation on the overview of technical assistance and the Board of Trustees of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Technical Cooperation to report on their work to the Council; this information would serve as a basis for the debate under agenda item 10; the resolution also encouraged Special Procedures to share information on best practices and cooperation with States; and requested States to provide assistance for cooperation, with a view to broadening the donor base. Thailand hoped that this cross-regional initiative would be adopted by consensus.

MARIA NAZARETH FARANI AZEVEDO (Brazil), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.24 Rev1, said Brazil was a core defender of human rights. By strengthening the capacity of States to respond to international human rights law, the Human Rights Council was working for all human rights victims. Technical cooperation and capacity building were not the solution in all cases. They are one of many helpful instruments. Technical cooperation and capacity building were a first step that would lead to more constructive steps.

OMAR HILALE (Morocco), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.24, said this resolution had a twofold objective: to allow the Council to better fulfill its mandate in capacity building and to provide for a dialogue and sharing of experiences and best practices in capacity building and technical assistance. Morocco had made South-South cooperation an objective of all of its foreign policy work. Concerning human rights, Morocco was pleased to announce that it had released a voluntary fund contribution of $ 500,000 for technical assistance. Morocco looked forward to the adoption by consensus of this resolution.

HARRIET E. BERG (Norway), speaking in a general comment, said that Norway decided early to become a co-sponsor to the resolution because technical cooperation and capacity building were fundamental and increasingly important tools for the promotion and protection of human rights. The Council’s attention to human rights violations and shortcomings must be combined with international technical support of national efforts. Norway had been concerned that the increased focus on the issue would increase the burden or reduce the independence of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and those holding mandates within the Special Procedures. The present text, however, represented only an opportunity and no limitations on their important work. The resolution on enhancement of technical assistance and capacity building in the field of human rights was very timely, and a logical step as the world increasingly recognized that human rights stood at the heart of peace, development and security.

RODOLFO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.24/Rev.1, said Cuba would like to congratulate the sponsors. It was no surprise that these delegations had traditionally shown a cooperative sprit. The debate on technical cooperation had been used to submit county resolutions and had been contaminated by country issues. The naming and blaming of countries often tended to be a mode of operation in the Human Rights Council. With this resolution serious debate on technical cooperation could be had, including real dialogue without imposition of views of certain countries. This resolution gave a very good sign, paying tribute to the very good work done by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and it gave the Human Rights Council some direction in their work.

Action on Resolution on Technical Assistance and Capacity Building to the Republic of Yemen in the Field of Human Rights

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L32) regarding technical assistance and capacity-building to the Republic of Yemen in the field of human rights, adopted without a vote, the Council calls upon the Government of Yemen and the other parties to address the recommendations in the report of the High Commissioner; notes the announcement of the Government of Yemen that it will launch transparent and independent investigations, which will adhere to international standards, into credible documented allegations of human rights violations through an independent committee and in consultation with political parties; condemns all violations of human rights in Yemen by all parties; calls upon all parties to move forward with negotiations on an inclusive, orderly and Yemen-led process of political transition on the basis of the Gulf Cooperation Council’s initiative; calls upon the Government of Yemen and the High Commissioner to develop a framework for continued dialogue and strengthened cooperation in the field of human rights, and the international community to support this cooperation; invites the Office of the High Commissioner to coordinate with donors on ways to assist the Government of Yemen and non-governmental organizations with capacity-building for the establishment of a national human rights institution; requests the Office of the High Commissioner to present a progress report on the situation of human rights in Yemen and the follow-up on the present resolution to the Human Rights Council at its nineteenth session.

IBRAHIM SAIED MOHAMED AL-ADOOFI. (Yemen), in an introduction of draft resolution L.32, said the interactive dialogue held in September 2011 set out Yemen’s position with an oral amendment noted in the body of the text.

DHARAR ABDUL-RAZZAK RAZZOOQI (Kuwait), speaking in a general comment, expressed appreciation as a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council for the initiative and gratitude to the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council for promoting cooperation and peace in the region and, in particular, to the Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council for his efforts towards peace and security.

IRUTHISHAM ADAM (Maldives), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.32, said it was important for Yemen to recognize the challenges and work with all stakeholders and address them. It was important to recognize the cooperation of the Yemini delegation with the Council. When setting up its domestic country led accountability mechanism, Yemen should make sure that the process was accountable and independent. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights should assist in on the ground capacity building for the benefit of the people of Yemen.

CHEIKH TIDIANE THIAM (Senegal), speaking on behalf of the African Group in a general comment on draft resolution L.32, said the African Group supported the draft resolution. The African Group’s position of principle on technical assistance was that assistance should be granted to the country based on the country’s request and on the country’s national priorities. The African Group noted that the draft resolution spoke of coordination between the Bureau of the Office of the High Commissioner with donors to build capacity and national human rights mechanisms in countries targeted for assistance.

ABDELWAHAB ATTAR (Saudi Arabia), speaking in a general comment, welcomed the initiative to provide assistance to Yemen in the field of human rights. Saudi Arabia as a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council had done as much as possible to support Yemen and guarantee peace and security. Saudi Arabia hoped that peace would be achieved through the implementation of the Gulf Cooperation Council initiative and reassured Yemen of its support in this regard.

REMIGIUSZ A. HENCZEL (Poland), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.32 on behalf of the European Union, said the European Union had constructively engaged with Yemen in the preparation of the text that could have been strengthened on the basis of the recent facts on the ground. The European Union wished that international oversight of the investigation could have been included. The European Union urged Yemen to give consent to the establishment of an office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in the country and urged the Council to remain aware of the situation of human rights in Yemen.

Action on Resolution on Panel on Multiculturalism as a Means of Protecting Human Rights and Combating Xenophobia, Discrimination and Intolerance

In a resolution (A/HRC/18/L17) regarding the panel on multiculturalism as a means of protecting human rights and combating xenophobia, discrimination and intolerance, adopted by a vote of 37 in favour, 1 against and 8 abstentions, the Council calls upon all States to acknowledge the existence of national, ethnic, linguistic and religious diversity, and to ensure that the rights of individuals to retain their culture and values should go hand in hand with enjoying full access to, participation in and adherence to constitutional principles and commonly shared values prevailing in society; also calls upon States to adopt policies that ensure non-discrimination and equitable access to social, political and economic rights, thus reducing pressures for social conflict based on disadvantage and inequality; decides to convene at its twentieth session a panel discussion on the promotion of multiculturalism as a means of protecting human rights and combating xenophobia, discrimination and intolerance; and requests the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to liaise with relevant special procedures and treaty bodies and stakeholders with a view to ensuring their participation in the panel discussion.

The result of the vote was as follows:

In favour (37): Angola, Bangladesh, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Djibouti, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Spain, Thailand, Uganda, and Uruguay.

Against (1): United States of America.

Abstentions (8): Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Republic of Moldova, Romania, and Switzerland.

HISHAM BADR (Egypt), introducing resolution L.17, said that the draft resolution concerned a panel on the protection of human rights in a multicultural context, including through combating xenophobia, discrimination and intolerance. It aimed at placing emphasis on multiculturalism as a central vehicle to promote an environment of tolerance through State policy and measures, whereby different cultures were recognized and lived side by side in society in co-existence and harmony, and where all persons belonging to these cultures equally enjoyed human rights and fundamental freedoms, free of discrimination. Its consideration was timely and brought clear added value into the effective fulfillment of the Council’s mandate. The provisions of the draft drew on universal instruments as a source of guidance and inspiration, clarified the nexus between multiculturalism and the enjoyment of human rights and called for the convening a panel discussion at the Council’s twentieth session, relying on the expertise of relevant stakeholders to pave the way for active consideration of the role of multiculturalism. Egypt welcomed the contributions of those who participated in the open and bilateral consultations and looked forward to the adoption of the draft by consensus.

CHEIKH TIDIANE THIAM (Senegal), speaking on behalf of the African Group in a general comment on draft resolution L.17, said the resolution stressed how important it was to promote multiculturalism to combat xenophobia, intolerance and bigotry to assure human rights. The African Group had decided to co-sponsor the draft resolution because it supported its spirit and humanist objectives.

EILEEN CHAMBERLAIN DONAHOE (United States), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.17, said the United States reiterated its support for human rights. The United States was privileged to have persons from all over the world among its citizens and was profoundly aware of and committed to the issues that promoted respect for diversity. The draft resolution suffered from conceptually flawed ideas. Egypt had submitted the resolution only minutes before the tabling deadline. The United States was concerned that the text failed to incorporate reference to existing human rights law that addressed discrimination. It was only through the promotion of universal human rights that tolerance could emerge. The United States would call for a vote and vote no.

RODOLFO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba), speaking in a general comment on draft resolution L.17, said the comments of the United States were unjust because Egypt had conducted an intense consultative process to reflect the views of all delegations. The broad coalition of sponsors included Africa and all regions of the world. The challenge and danger which faced the international community was the so-called failure of multiculturalism which would destroy harmony and cooperation. Multiculturalism should be saved as a fundamental principle of human rights.

__________

For use of the information media; not an official record