Posted on 04/27/2003 3:31:19 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
On Friday the United Nations Human Rights Commission deferred a landmark resolution on human rights and sexual orientation until next year, apparently after five Muslim nations -- four of them United States allies -- maneuvered procedural delays.
Libyan chairwomen Najjat Al-Hajjaji's proposal to defer the resolution to the next year's session was voted 24-17 with 12 abstentions, amid protests from Canada, European Union and Brazil.
Friday was the last day of the 59th session of the U.N. Human Rights Commission.
Frederico S. Duque Estrada Meyer of the Brazilian delegation in Geneva called it a "double victory," saying if the resolution had been put to vote it might have been defeated. Meyer said, "We have one year to act. ... The issue of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation is on the table, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and other opponents of the resolution will not get rid of it."
On Thursday, Brazil initiated debate on its resolution, titled "Human Rights and Sexual Orientation," arguing that it created no new rights and that it was strictly based on existing treaties.
The opposition came from mostly military-run Pakistan on the grounds that the resolution conflicted with Islam. Pakistan proposed "no action" to avoid a voting on the resolution but was defeated 24-22, with six abstentions. Behind the scenes, the Vatican itself was said to be pressuring predominantly Catholic Latin American nations against the resolution, sources in Geneva said.
The Muslim bloc nations, namely Saudia Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Libya and Malaysia, succeeded in delaying a vote by proposing five different amendments to the resolution. On Thursday, Al-Hajjaji postponed the vote until Friday.
In Geneva, Jan Doerfel of the International Research Centre for Social Minorities told the Gay.com/PlanetOut.com Network on Friday: "In spite of the unholy alliance between the Holy See and the OIC, this was a monumental step. This has led to victories that have to be built upon in the years ahead."
Faisal Alam, founder of world's first openly queer Muslim organization, Washington-based Al Fatiha, said on Friday, "I am obviously upset. The issue of GLBT rights has been sacrificed at the altar of political expediency." Alam alleged "blackmail" of the 57-member OIC, U.S. opportunism and the Vatican pressure as the three main reasons that led to Friday's postponement of the vote.
Others felt there were reasons for cheer. Suki Beavers of the Canadian Action for Population and Development said via e-mail, "This resolution was not defeated and we will be back with a vengeance next year. Although we didn't get a full out victory, neither is this a defeat and it is clear that this will be the issue for the (U.N.) CHR next year."
According to Doerfel, the nations who were clearly in favor of the Brazilian initiative were Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Guatemala, Ireland, Japan, Poland, South Korea, Russian Federation, Sweden, Thailand, Ukraine and the United Kingdom.
Those who were clearly opposed to the draft resolution were Cameroon, Gabon, Kenya, Libya, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Syria, Uganda and Zimbabwe.
The nations leaning towards no, though not explicitly so, were Argentina, China, Congo, India and Senegal.
The United States led the fence-sitting nations that included Chile, Paraguay, Peru, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Togo, and Vietnam. Other nations said to be in this category were Cuba, Swaziland, Uruguay and Venezula.
The first-of-its-kind resolution in the U.N.'s 60-year history, the measure had expressed deep concern at the occurrence of violations of human rights on grounds of sexual orientation and urged all states to promote and protect the human rights of all persons regardless of their sexual orientation.
According to the Amnesty International, millions of people across the globe face imprisonment, torture, violence and discrimination because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
And a fine session it was.
Face it - Castro's a Tyrant*** Gone also, by the way, is any persuasive argument that the United Nations has relevance in the fight for governmental decency in this world. Its Human Rights Commission winked at Castro's latest depravity, saying only that a U.N. representative should visit the island to see what's up. Stay out, Cuba replied.
So what's to be done? Simply extending the U.S. embargo from here to eternity is unlikely to achieve much, but neither is it consonant with the lessons of history that rewarding criminals stops crime. At the least, voices must rise in fierce condemnation, and from all over the civilized world. The dissidents must be encouraged, their tormentors excoriated. The free world must not let go of its outrage, but beat the drum regularly, turning to other sanctions if effective, humane ones can be found, while insistently seeking the release of all Castro's political prisoners and the demise of his government by thuggery.***
The vote will probably come down to a compromise to please both sides: Gays have all the rights of husband and wife, with all the benefits, but they must report for immediate execution or something along those lines.
Heck, the leftists may decided a partial win is better than none at all...
Amen, Bro. Just wait until Equitorial Guinea, Bhutan, or Benin holds the swing vote on anti-terror legislation, or Nuclear Proliferation. And the US and her opponents have to go begging with concessions and hat in hand for their vote, and hoping we beat the French to it.
Get us out of the UN!!
Oddly enough the burka predates Islam in that region of the world. Both men and women of the leisure class wore it lest their beauty, being seen by the lower class, incited them to be raped.
Interesting idea, but how would you go about dismantling the UN? Let review, President Bush just cut of the "food for oil" money-laundering program. Kyoto treaty is dead.
The UN may have greased the wheels for Mexican and Canadian politicians to let illegal aliens to enter their county to invade America. No US support for the war from Canada and Mexico reveals that the UN plays a major roll in their country. I don’t trust or support the UN, Mexico or Canada at this point in time because I believe their policies are focused on a one world government and destroying a sovereign America.
Dismantle the UN before the UN dismantles America.
THANK JIMMY! I believe the oil crises was a way to get Pres. Carter out of office because of UN agreement like the on below.
At the direction of President Carter, the U.S. State Department entered into an agreement with UNESCO (M) in 1979 to launch a U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program. Congress was not consulted, nor was any state legislature consulted, as 47 U.N. Biosphere reserves were quietly designated in the United States.
The preamble to the section on Land, says: "Land...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable...."
The UN has US how to get out is going to be a fight.
I move that the US approrpirate funds for Gay Nation to hold some of it's famously violent and raunchy protests in these places.
The one who is shot second.
I should also mention that there was an element of jest in that remark.
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.