Human rights at the UN General Assembly: country-specific or not?
Should the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee take country-specific human rights resolutions?
The 20-21 November New York Update from the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) reports that Cuba, the Sudan and Nicaragua took the floor before the Third Committee considered any of the country-specific resolutions on its agenda to say why the General Assembly should not deal with such resolutions.
Their primary objection is that they consider the [UN Human Rights] Council to be the most appropriate body within the UN system to consider human rights matters in specific countries, using the UPR [Universal Periodic Review] mechanism, which they regard as non-selective, non-confrontational, and an effective mechanism for engaging States in a human rights dialogue.
The USA and Australia responded to this claim by saying that country-specific resolutions were necessary to stop countries getting away with human rights violations with impunity and to help the victims of human rights abuses. As Liechtenstein pointed out, the Third Committee, unlike the Human Rights Council, has universal membership and the responsibility to deal with serious human rights violations.
The ISHR’s Update also reported that:
States in favour of country-specific resolutions also objected to any moves to stifle debate on serious human rights matters within the Third Committee, and pointed to the right of any State to bring forward a resolution in the General Assembly on any matter of concern.
As I reported on Wednesday, Iran did in fact try to stifle debate on serious human rights issues, in so far as they affected Iran, by tabling a no-action motion. That the motion failed by only one vote tells us that something is sadly amiss as far as the UN’s consideration of human rights is concerned.
I am very much in favour of appropriately used country-specific resolutions. (I say “appropriately used” because country-specific resolutions can be used vexatiously to target countries that do not deserve to be targeted while neglecting countries that do deserve to be targeted.) Iran is a country that cannot be allowed to get away with its appalling treatment of minorities, including the Baha’is, and with its many other terrible violations of its citizens’ human rights.
Claims by countries that the Third Committee should not consider country-specific human rights resolutions are entirely self-serving. Just look at the countries that took time at the Third Committee to argue against country-specific resolutions: Cuba, Sudan and Nicaragua are not exactly shining examples of human rights compliant states.
And to say that human rights matters should be handled only by the UN Human Rights Council is also self-serving, since the Council’s effectiveness has been limited - neutered, some would say - by the machinations of member states that are amongst the worst human rights abusers. In fact, the Human Rights Council has largely abandoned country-specific resolutions, except with respect to Israel.
Technorati Tags: human rights, UN, Third Committee, Iran, Israel, Baha’i, Bahai
2 comments
For those who believe Human Rights are a Western invention, here are some quotes from several prestigious persons (none of them is European or American).
“Any suggestion that freedom of expression is a luxury of the West insults the historic struggles of individuals and communities…We are all agreed what torture is. What rape means. What child prostitution is. What genocide entails. Then let us not pretend not to know what human rights truly represent.”
– Wole Soyinka, Nigerian writer and Nobel laureate
“Democracy and human rights are the common needs of all cultures and human societies. Those who use the pretext of cultural relativism to ignore the need of democracy and human rights are in fact reactionary bullies who want to hide their despotic nature behind a mask of culture.”
– Shirin Ebadi
“It was never the people who complained of the universality of human rights, nor did the people consider human rights as a Western or Northern imposition. It was often their leaders who did so.”
– Kofi Annan
“It has long been recognized that an essential element in protecting human rights was a widespread knowledge among the population of what their rights are and how they can be defended.”
– Boutros Boutros-Ghali,
“Peace can only last where human rights are respected, where the people are fed, and where individuals and nations are free.”
– 14th Dalai Lama
“We believe that human rights transcend boundaries and must prevail over state sovereignty.”
– José Ramos-Horta (East-Timor President)
Marco, many thanks indeed for sharing these excellent quotes. They really do give the lie to the idea that human rights are an invention of the West or the North or, indeed, purely of Christians.
Leave a Comment