人权理事会就南苏丹人权状况举行小组讨论（部分翻译）

人权理事会
下午

2014年9月24日

人权理事会今天下午南苏丹人权状况举行了一场小组讨论，听取了人权事务副高级专员弗拉维亚•潘谢里就这一严重令人担忧的状况向委员会作出的情况更新。

人权理事会主席波德莱尔•恩东•艾拉（Baudelaire Ndong Ella）表示，本场讨论的关注重点为辨明促进该国人权状况的有效措施，并加强联合国对非洲联盟调查委员会工作和政府间发展管理局领导的和平进程的支持。

人权事务副高级专员弗拉维亚•潘谢里表示，关于人权高专纳维•皮莱4月对南苏丹访问情况的报告揭露了该国的严重暴力等级，包括种族原因驱动的大规模屠杀和骇人听闻的报复性杀害。自那以来，境内流离失所者数量不断攀升，约10万人目前正在联合国南苏丹特派团驻地内寻求庇护。该国正经历着极端的粮食不安全并面对潜在的饥荒。与此同时，平民死伤和冲突相关性暴力的报告也持续出现。潘谢里女士表示，对过去严重侵犯人权现象的有罪不罚传统助长了南苏丹的当前危机。她强调，对该国境内侵犯人权现象、侵害和其他国际犯罪进行问责极为重要。

吉布提常驻联合国日内瓦办事处代表兼小组讨论主持人默罕默德•赛义德•杜阿勒（Mohamed Said Doualeh）表示，关于南苏丹状况的小组讨论旨在辨明促进该国人权状况的有效措施，并加强非洲联盟南苏丹调查委员会的任务。

南苏丹司法部部长保利诺•瓦纳维拉•乌南戈（Paulino Wanawilla Unango）表示，2013年12月于朱巴发生的事件是一场未遂的政变，这并非种族仇恨，而是一场政治斗争的一部分。南苏丹政府已接受政府间发展管理局的调停，并于2014年8月28日签署了一份公报，同意与反对派苏丹人民解放运动进行协商，组建过渡政府。乌南戈先生表示，保护平民是该国的优先事项，并重申其结束国内冲突的承诺。

非洲联盟南苏丹调查委员会主席奥卢塞贡•奥巴桑乔（Olusegun Obasanjo）就委员会治愈创伤、和解和问责的任务进行了发言。毫无疑问，南苏丹存在严重侵犯人权现象，所有政治领导人都为此负有责任。朱巴的冲突始于一场政治纠纷，但随即转变为种族冲突。有罪不罚的恶性循环必须被遏止，需要在社区层面采取某种形式的复原活动。

埃塞俄比亚代表政府间发展管理局主席兼南苏丹问题特使塞尤姆•梅斯芬（Seyoum Mesfin）宣读了声明，重申尊重人权和法治必须被作为和平进程的基石，呼吁各方遵守政府间发展管理局主持斡旋的协定。和平进程仍面对着诸多挑战，仍有许多人将军事手段置于和平解决方案之上。显然和平协定必须全面解决危机根源，为真诚且广泛的改革营造条件。

南苏丹人权委员会主席劳伦斯•科班迪（Lawrence Korbandy）表示，南苏丹侵犯和违反人权现象的详细情况不容忽视，必须做出努力以在该国实现和平。已有逾万人在这场冲突中丧生，9万人被迫流离失所，社会凝聚力遭到了破坏。各方确保尊重和落实《停止活动协定》、加快维和人员的部署并确保过渡进程以人为本极为关键。

联合国南苏丹特派团人权主任易卜拉欣•瓦尼（Ibrahim Wani）表示，鉴于该国的广泛暴力，我们有可靠的理由相信冲突各方都实施了危害人类罪。由于问责制对实现全国和解极为关键，应立即设立国际刑事法院，以就这些犯罪查明责任。在冲突开始9个月后，我们必须停止辩论，采取切实行动。

在随后的讨论中，发言者对在数月努力后，南苏丹严重侵犯和违反人权现象依然持续表示极度担忧。部分现象已构成战争罪和危害人类罪，逾150万人流离失所。代表团强调，政治领导力和政治远见对实现和平与稳定极为必要。代表团还强调了司法和问责制必须被作为和平努力的核心。发言者对政府间发展管理局领导的和平进程表示支持，并鼓励非洲联盟调查委员会继续开展其工作。人权理事会应设立特别程序任务，就该国人权状况进行监测和报告。

在讨论中发言的包括：欧盟、代表非洲集团发言的埃塞俄比亚、捷克共和国、荷兰、俄罗斯、黑山、多哥、西班牙、科威特、美国、土耳其、挪威、澳大利亚、丹麦、古巴、爱沙尼亚、意大利、联合王国、斯里兰卡、中国、法国、加拿大、苏丹和比利时。

下列非政府组织也进行了发言：东非和非洲之角人权维护者项目（East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders）、世界公民参与联盟（CIVICUS-World Alliance for Citizen Participation）、挪威难民理事会（Norwegian Refugee Council）、非洲妇女团结会（Femmes Africa Solidarites）和国际明爱会（Caritas Internationalis）。

人权理事会将于9月25日（周四）恢复其工作并举行全天会议。上午9点，它将与索马里人权状况独立专家举行互动讨论，并在之后与中非共和国人权状况独立专家举行互动对话。下午3点，理事会将按照计划开始就决定和决议采取行动。

Opening Statements

BAUDELAIRE NDONG ELLA, President of the Human Rights Council, said that this meeting would be devoted to a panel discussion on the human rights situation in South Sudan. The objective was to identify effective measures to improve the human rights situation in South Sudan, and to bolster the support of the United Nations for the African Union’s Commission of Inquiry in South Sudan, as well as to support the peace process led by the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development.

FLAVIA PANSIERI, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, in an opening statement said that the situation in South Sudan continued to be a matter of grave concern. At the twenty-sixth session of the Human Rights Council, the High Commissioner had been requested to submit a report on the situation of human rights to serve as a basis for discussion during this panel. In June, Ms. Pansieri said she had alerted the Council about the deteriorating situation, and referred to the visit of High Commissioner Navi Pillay in April this year, which revealed a critical level of violence, including ethnically motivated mass slaughter and gruesome revenge killings. A report of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan from May had described the damaging impact of the conflict on human rights across the country, including gross violations committed by all parties to the conflict. During the reporting period, the scale and severity of reported violations and abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law had declined if compared to the first months of the conflict. However, civilians had continued to bear the brunt of the ongoing armed conflict and of their leaders’ failure to stop the fighting.

The Government of Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army in Opposition had continued to mobilize forces and amass weapons in an effort to consolidate their respective power bases and to undermine the protection of civilians and life-saving work of humanitarian agencies and the United Nations Mission in South Sudan. The number of civilians displaced across and from South Sudan had continued to rise, with no likelihood that people would return to their homes soon. The country was experiencing extreme food insecurity and faced a possible famine. The reports of killings and wounding of civilians by all parties to the armed conflict and other armed groups had continued unabated, so had incidents of conflict-related sexual violence. The United Nations Mission had opened its gates to civilians who fled the violence. Around 100,000 internally displaced persons were now seeking shelter in “protection of civilians’ sites” within its compounds, an unprecedented influx in the history of the United Nations and which presented the Mission with unique challenges.

A legacy of impunity for serious human rights violations in the past had contributed to the current crisis in South Sudan. To ensure sustainable peace, security and development in South Sudan, it was vital that perpetrators of human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law and other international crimes be held accountable. The international community must put pressure on the country’s leaders to prevent further violations by forces under their command and to make clear that anyone committing crimes and human rights violations would be arrested and prosecuted.

Statements by the Panel Moderator and Panellists

MOHAMED SIAD DOUALEH, Permanent Representative of Djibouti to the United Nations Office at Geneva and panel moderator, reminded that the purpose of the panel discussion on South Sudan was to focus on identifying effective measures to improve the human rights situation in South Sudan, and to strengthen the mandate of the African Union’s Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan.

PAULINO WANAWILLA UNANGO, Minister of Justice of South Sudan, said that the events of 15 and 16 December 2013 in Juba constituted an attempted coup d’état punishable under the South Sudan Penal Code. In response to the coup, the Government had formed a crisis management committee to maintain stability and promote calm among the population, particularly in the areas not affected by the rebellion. He underlined that the events in Juba did not happen because of an ethnic feud, but that they were part of a political struggle. The Government had accepted the cessation of hostilities and negotiations under the mediation of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, and attended the talks in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. As a result, on 28 August 2014, the Government of South Sudan had signed a communiqué which provided for negotiations between the Government and the Sudanese Peoples Liberation Movement-in-Opposition (SPLM-IO) to form an interim Government. The Government also established an investigation committee into human rights violations, and a combined patrol from all organized forces to restore peace and security in the capital. The latter measure improved security and was still being maintained to combat various crimes.

The Government also accepted the Commission of Inquiry formed by the African Human Rights Commission under the African Union to investigate human rights violations in South Sudan. In addition, it formed the Popular Committee for Peace Building, which succeeded in convincing many internally displaced persons to get out of the affected areas. The Government regained control of areas under rebel control in three states: Jonglei, Upper Nile and Unity, and restored peace to the Pibor area. In those areas the violations of human rights had decreased significantly. It further made provisions for the education of children in the affected areas, and freedom of expression. Mr. Unango concluded by saying that the protection of civilians was the Government’s priority, and that the Government was committed to ending the conflict in South Sudan with the help of the African Union and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development.

OLUSEGUN OBASANJO, Chairperson of the African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan, said that the African Union had to be commended for having established the Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan. The Commission was given three mandates: healing, reconciliation and accountability. Institutional form was the fourth mandate added later on in order to lead to a united and cohesive Sudan. In order to assess the extent of the conflict and human rights violations, the Commission had visited the region of Juba and met with governmental and civil society representatives, and representatives of international organizations. They also met with regional leaders in Ethiopia, Sudan, Kenya and Uganda, and visited refugee camps both inside South Sudan and in neighbouring countries. He said there was no doubt that gross violations of human rights were committed, and that no political leader in South Sudan could claim innocence. The cycle of impunity had to be stopped.

In its conversations with local leaders, the Commission stressed that hostilities had to stop before healing could begin. South Sudan had to build a leadership that would be responsive to the needs of the population. Mr. Obasanjo confirmed that the conflict in Juba started as a political dispute, but that it quickly transformed into an ethnic conflict. He added that some form of restitution needed to take place at the community level. He thanked the Government of South Sudan, civil society, academia and the media, and international organizations for their support in the Commission’s work.

MOHAMED SAID DOUALEH, Permanent Representative of Djibouti to the United Nations Office at Geneva and the panel moderator, thanked Mr. Obasanjo for sharing the outcome of the extensive consultations and meeting with a wide range of stakeholders in the country and the region. The call that the international community should ‘take the bull by the horn’ was heard.

The Permanent Representative of Ethiopia to the United Nations Office at Geneva, speaking on behalf of SEYOUM MESFIN, the Chairperson of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development Special Envoy for South Sudan, said that from the beginning of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development-led mediation efforts in South Sudan, it had been continually reiterated that respect for human rights and the rule of law had to be cornerstones of the peace process. All parties in South Sudan continued to be urged to fulfil their obligations under national law and international law and to comply with the agreements brokered under the auspices of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development. Since the outbreak of the conflict in December 2013, the foremost concern had been to bring the fighting to an end. Millions continued to be displaced within the country and neighbouring States, education and health services had been interrupted and the humanitarian situation was dire.

The peace process was a violation of the most basic right of all of South Sudan’s citizens; the right to live in peace. The parties were urged once again to make every effort to implement agreements signed. Commitments, however, went beyond the immediate confines of the conflict. While progress had been made, the peace process continued to face many challenges and as fighting last week had shown, there were still elements that privileged military means over a peaceful solution. In terms of progress, while most disputes tended to focus on arrangements for power and the transitional government, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development was acutely aware of the need for an agreement that was comprehensive, addressed the root causes of the crisis, and created conditions for genuine and far-reaching reform.

LAWRENCE KORBANDY, Chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of South Sudan, said that regardless of the different viewpoints, the report presented today had given a detailed account of human rights abuses and violations in South Sudan that could simply not be ignored. It was a reminder that efforts had to be made to achieve peace in the country. The report noted improvements in the area of the right to life. The situation of internally displaced persons and restrictions on freedom of expression and the media were all consequences of the war situation. There was a need to ensure accountability and mechanisms for truth and reparation. The South Sudan Human Rights Commission had a constitutional mandate to promote human rights, denounce human rights violations, and make recommendations and give advice to the Government. The Commission recommended that the Government should undertake institutional and economic reforms.

A national human rights forum had been organized in 2012 to raise awareness on human rights among the population. In July, a document was published by the Commission on solutions to end the conflict. Different sources revealed that over 10,000 people had lost their lives as a result of the conflict. Ethnic tensions were also an issue of concern. It destroyed social cohesion and led to 90,000 internally displaced persons being reluctant to return home. Freedoms of expression and the media were important, and the number of radio channels being allowed to broadcast and express views had increased. Some radio stations had however been restricted in their activities. The Government had accepted that non-governmental organizations participate in the peace talks. Parties of the conflict should respect and implement the Cessation of Activities Agreement, and expedite the deployment of peacekeepers. The transitional processes should be people-centred.

IBRAHIM WANI, Director of Human Rights of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan, commended the Human Rights Council for having organized the panel discussion. The United Nations closely followed the situation in South Sudan and monitored allegations of human rights violations. Reports documented numerous targeting of civilians, forced disappearances, gender violence and rape, arbitrary arrest and detention, torture, looting, and attacks on hospitals, churches and mosques. Such acts were committed by both sides of the conflict. In light of the widespread violence, there were firm reasons to believe that crimes against humanity were committed. The reports recommended the immediate establishment of an international crimes tribunal to establish responsibility for the committed crimes. Ethnically targeted killings and inter-clan murders also took place, and freedom of expression severely declined. Journalists and civil society organizations were repeatedly attacked. Despite pledges by leaders of both sides that those responsible would be held accountable, that did not happen. Mr. Wani stressed that accountability would be crucial in achieving national reconciliation. He underlined that nine months after the conflict started, debating had to stop and concrete actions had to be taken.

Discussion

European Union was extremely worried that after months of efforts, serious human rights violations and abuses in South Sudan continued. In light of the dire situation, the European Union stressed its call for the creation of a Special Procedures mandate to monitor and report to the Council on the human rights situation in South Sudan. Czech Republic said that the human rights situation in South Sudan remained of serious concern. It condemned the massive human rights abuses and serious violations of international humanitarian law committed by parties to the conflict, some of which may amount to war crimes or crimes against humanity. Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the African Group, welcomed the ongoing Intergovernmental Authority on Development-led peace process. The role of the African Union Commission of Inquiry was commended and the African Group called on the Council, United Nations bodies, specialized agencies and other stakeholders to support its work. Russia believed that a political solution was the solution to the internal conflict. It could not be solved by the use of force. Russia was concerned about the lack of political will of leaders to implement the compromised solutions that had been so hard to achieve. The shift of focus to protecting civilians and humanitarian aid was necessary at this point. Netherlands repeated its concern about the human rights situation in South Sudan. Many South Sudanese lived in uncertainty and in the worst of circumstances. The Government of South Sudan and the armed opposition were called upon to stop any use of violence and to ensure accountability for crimes committed.

Montenegro affirmed its support to the people of South Sudan and to humanitarian workers there. Montenegro was deeply concerned about attacks against civilians, sexual and gender-based violence and the recruitment of child soldiers, and underlined the importance of accountability. Political leadership and vision were crucial for the establishment of peace and stability. Togo was deeply concerned about the situation in South Sudan, its impact on stability in the region and the humanitarian situation there. Togo called on parties to facilitate and secure access to humanitarian aid. Togo urged all parties to commit to an inclusive and open dialogue towards achieving peace. Spain rejected the continued human rights violations by both sides of the conflict, including killings, sexual abuse and forced recruitment. Spain was also concerned by the way freedom of expression had been hampered and by the humanitarian situation in conflict zones, including with regards to access to food. The Council should establish a mechanism on the situation in South Sudan. Kuwait said that the Council had unanimously extended assistance and capacity building to South Sudan. Kuwait called on all parties to commit themselves to a constructive dialogue for peace and called upon the international community to provide support to neighbouring countries that were receiving refugees. United States was gravely concerned about the glaring human rights violations and abuses and other atrocities in South Sudan and the humanitarian crisis that had displaced more than 1.5 million people. The United States condemned violations of international humanitarian law, including hostilities against civilians, and the lack of accountability for those atrocities. Turkey was concerned about continuing violence in South Sudan and its consequences on civilians. Turkey was pleased to see that there was now a commitment to reach a compromise, and would continue engaging with South Sudan for the achievement of peace.

Norway welcomed the convening of the panel discussion on the situation in South Sudan by the Human Rights Council, and said that both sides had committed grave human rights violations. A large number of refugees were in neighbouring countries, which caused great concern. Norway underlined that it was up to the leaders of both sides to ensure accountability for the committed crimes, and noted that impunity was unacceptable. East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders said that freedom of expression was severely limited in South Sudan, with journalists harassed and media outlets closed, which prevented wider participation in reconciliation and healing. The organization urged the Council to establish a Special Rapporteur for South Sudan to ensure justice and accountability. Civicus said it was concerned about persistent violations of international human rights law in South Sudan. South Sudan needed a reconciliation and truth commission, and hybrid court, and Civicus urged the Council to establish a Special Rapporteur for South Sudan. Norwegian Refugee Council expressed concern over human rights violations in South Sudan, noting that more than 11 percent of the population was affected by displacement. Freedom of movement was severely hindered. Refugees faced protection issues at all stages, and lacked access to basic services. Food insecurity was severe, with 15,000 children at risk of dying of malnutrition. Australia was concerned about South Sudan’s failure to commit to ceasefire agreements. Justice and accountability were a vital part of peace processes. Australia welcomed that South Sudan said it would exclude war criminals from the new Government.

Denmark was concerned about the humanitarian situation in South Sudan, and called on all parties to ensure unhindered humanitarian access and protect humanitarian workers. Cuba welcomed efforts by the African Union for a lasting solution to the conflict, and underlined the importance of the support of the Council and international donors to South Sudan through technical assistance and capacity building. Estonia regretted that the cessation of hostilities agreement continued to be breached, and that a coalition government could not be put in place. Famine in the months to come was deeply worrying, and so were human rights and humanitarian law violations and the lack of accountability for perpetrators. Italy remained gravely concerned about the human rights and humanitarian situations in South Sudan and atrocities against civilians. Italy underlined the importance of monitoring and accountability. Widespread intimidation and harassment of journalists and human rights defenders were also issues of great concern.

United Kingdom said that solving the conflict was crucial, but peace was not enough in itself as the responsibility of those who committed the crimes must be established. The United Kingdom supported the work of the African Union’s Commission of Inquiry and called for the creation of a Special Procedure mandate to monitor and report on the human rights situation in the country. Justice and accountability must be at the centre of peace efforts. Sri Lanka called upon all parties to commit to inclusive dialogue to achieve reconciliation and peace and welcomed the leading role of the African Union and the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development in the peace process. In spite of the successful conclusion of a peace agreement by the parties, the human rights and humanitarian situation in South Sudan remained of concern and China called on the parties to implement existing agreements as a way to build fundamental improvement to the human rights and humanitarian situation. France said that the scale of the crimes and the impunity had shaken the foundation of the South Sudanese society and encouraged the African Union Commission of Inquiry to pursue its work.

Canada said it was appalled by the worsening human right situation in South Sudan, as well as by the reported use of child soldiers. Canada called on the parties to the conflict to lay down their weapons, and stressed that words needed to be turned into genuine actions. Canada supported international efforts to end the conflict. Sudan wished to see stability and peace in South Sudan and supported all African mechanisms dealing with the conflict. Sudan said that a comprehensive political solution under the African umbrella was the best way to reach stability in South Sudan. Belgium said the human rights situation in South Sudan was worrisome, in particular the situation of children affected by the conflict, and systematic recruitment of children into armed forces. Belgium underlined that the fight against impunity was crucial, and asked the Council for effective measures on the question of impunity.

Femmes Africa Solidarité expressed concern about grave human right violations in South Sudan, particularly the killing and rape of women. The fighting continued despite the signing of the peace agreement. The organization urged the parties to the conflict to end the lack of accountability for sexual and gender violence, and called for the inclusion of South Sudanese women as rightful stakeholders in peace talks. Caritas Internationalis underlined that 1.7 million people were estimated to have fled their homes in South Sudan, and warned that food insecurity was a serious problem. It was the moral responsibility of the international community to end this conflict. The situation of aid workers was grave, and parties to the conflict were urged to ensure safe humanitarian access.

Concluding Remarks

OLUSEGUN OBASANJO, Chairperson of the African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan, said that the Commission would submit a report to the African Union within the first half of October. The African Union would not deal with this report alone, and would seek support from all willing to help it in the implementation of its recommendations.

MOHAMED SAID DOUALEH, Permanent Representative of Djibouti to the United Nations Office at Geneva and panel moderator, thanked the speakers for their comments and questions, and asked panel members to address specific issues raised during the dialogue.

PAULINO WANAWILLA UNANGO, Minister of Justice, Government of the Republic of South Sudan, in concluding remarks said that it was not true that South Sudan had discriminatory policies against foreigners with regards to access to employment.
With regards to freedom of expression, the media law had been adopted as a legitimate instrument in conformity with international law. The National Security Law would be passed by the Assembly.

LAWRENCE KORBANDY, Chairperson, Human Rights Commission, South Sudan, said in concluding remarks that the Commission supported the task entrusted to regional institutions to monitor human rights in South Sudan, and any mechanism for accountability should be negotiated to ensure better implementation. A coalition Government, composed of people who were enemies, might be counterproductive and may not carry out the necessary actions of a peace process.

IBRAHIM WANI, Director of Human Rights, United Nations Mission in South Sudan, assured the Council that the Mission was committed to fulfil its mandate to monitor the human rights situation in South Sudan with the highest standards of verification. The promotion and protection of human rights was also an international obligation, and the Human Rights Council therefore had a responsibility to continue playing a role for the improvement of the situation in South Sudan.


_____________

For use of the information media; not an official record