Posted on 04/26/2003 10:37:54 AM PDT by knighthawk
GENEVA: The UN Human Rights Commission ended its annual six-week session Friday amid criticism that it was dominated by political horse-trading and did too little for the victims of abuses worldwide.
The 53-member commission - the top UN human rights watchdog - is gradually losing its role as a defender of liberties, campaigners said.
In his closing speech to the commission, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Sergio Vieira de Mello said commission members should steer clear of politics and return the focus to violations.
``There really is nothing more serious than the protection of human rights,'' he said. ``Yet at times I have felt that ... delegates were losing sight of the noble goal of protecting human rights, in the very body whose duty it is to promote them.''
At this year's meeting, commission members used a procedural move to block discussion of alleged human rights violations in Zimbabwe, ended scrutiny of Sudan and rejected a resolution condemning Russia's record in Chechnya. They narrowly passed a resolution calling on Cuba to accept a visit by a human rights investigator but failed to approve an amendment criticizing the country's recent crackdown on the opposition - leading to Cuban claims of a ``moral victory.''
Membership of the commission rotates, with each of five regional groups entitled to nominate members. This year included an unusually high number of countries which stand accused of violations.
Zimbabwe, Sudan, Russia and Cuba all are members of the commission and mustered solid support in votes, avoiding censure. Censure by the commission brings no penalties but spotlights a country's behaviour.
``Countries with a terrible human rights record now command a large bloc of votes,'' said Joanna Weschler, the UN representative for the US-based group Human Rights Watch. ``You have a caucus that has one thing in common - a bad human rights record.''
While welcoming resolutions condemning North Korea - the first time the commission has censured the communist nation - Turkmenistan and Belarus, campaigners complain they will have little impact because they contain no way to even monitor rights violations.
Antoine Madelin, UN representative for the Paris-based International Federation for Human Rights, said the commission felt like a ``trade fair.''
``Countries seem to bargain resolutions between themselves and human rights considerations get left far behind,'' he said. ``It's only because nations are not present or have weak political performance that they can be condemned at all.''
Campaigners also criticised the commission's decision to postpone for twelve months its first-ever attempt to tackle the issue of homosexual rights - after it ran out of time to debate the subject.
After getting bogged down in a procedural debate over two days, the commission decided to wait until its 2004 session to discuss a resolution expressing ``deep concern at the occurrence of violations of human rights in the world against persons on the grounds of their sexual orientation.'' The proposal, lodged by Brazil, was backed by European countries.
Muslim members of the commission said they were against any resolution containing the words ``sexual orientation.'' They proposed five amendments and raised multiple points of order in what campaigners said was a successful filibuster.
Many developing countries regularly say Western nations spend too much time at the commission talking about things like elections and press freedom and too little about the issues that they say are of greater concern to the poor.
Cuba, for example, insists its rights record is good. It says it respects human rights by guaranteeing its people broad social services such as free health care and education, and that rich nations that fail to protect the poor are in no position to preach. The commission has censured the communist island for its lack of democracy and free speech every year over the past decade except 1998.
Many of the debates at this year's commission were overshadowed by the Iraq conflict.
On March 27 the human rights body rejected a proposal to hold an emergency meeting on the war, then underway for just 10 days - a move which angered developing nations. Human rights campaigners also said governments should have taken the opportunity to focus on the situation facing ordinary Iraqis.
But wary that any debate would turn political, Canada, Japan, European and several Latin American nations lined up with the United States to defeat a resolution calling on the commission to ``consider the effects of the war on the Iraqi people and their humanitarian situation.''
On Friday, the commission voted to condemn abuses during Saddam Hussein's rule. Many developing countries said the commission also should have voted to examine whether US-led coalition forces are themselves violating rights as they occupy Iraq.
Cuba, for example, insists its rights record is good
So putting political opponents away for 20 years is something which falls into the 'good' catagory? No wonder they choose Libya to head this debating club.
No more UN for US-list
If people want on or off this list, please let me know.
What more needs to be said?
What's a developing country and how long does it take one to develop?Why not call them,"Countries controlled by Communist Dictators?"
Not PC,eh?
Aren't all commies dictators (or potential ones)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.