No actions at the CHR
Resolution on Uzbekistan is unlikely to inspire the 60^th session of the CHR

“The word politicization and its variants should be retired from active service … Most people in the Commission worked for governments and sought to affect the actions of governments. That was politics. For some to accuse others of being political was a bit like fish criticizing one another of being wet. The accusation hardly meant anything anymore. It had become a way to express disapproval without saying what was really on our mind. The Commission could use plainer speaking. This, rather than charges of politicsation, would truly help the Commission get beyond politics to the strengthening of human rights in all countries”. – Late Sergio Veira de Mello, High Commissioner for Human Rights in his closing remarks at the 59^th session of the Commission on Human Rights.

In its first oral intervention at the 60^th session, China raised the bogey of “politicisation” of the Commission on Human Rights; and as the spokesman of the Like Minded Group (LMG) suggested deletion of the agenda item 9 on country situations. The LMG might not have yet garnered adequate support to do away with agenda item 9 on country situations but “politicization and selectivity” will be raised by the LMG to portray themselves as the victims when the CHR votes on resolutions, among others, on agenda item 9 during the fifth week of the 60^th session (13-16 April 2004). While the resolutions on the occupied Arab territories will be adopted with the usual lone opposition of the United States, a few country resolutions will certainly face stiff opposition from the fundamentalists at the Commission.

This is despite the fact that 60^th session has already set a good precedent on country resolutions under 1503 Confidential Procedure. China reportedly continued its onslaught against country resolutions under the 1503 Confidential Procedure. But, the 60^th session has reportedly adopted a resolution on human rights situation in Uzbekistan with overwhelming majority under the 1503 Confidential Procedure and appointed an independent expert to report to the 61^st session. The adoption of the resolution on Uzbekistan with overwhelming majority has reportedly rattled China which fears that its “No Action Motion” against the US sponsored resolution on human rights situation in China may be defeated.

The resolution on human rights situation on Uzbekistan under 1503 Confidential Procedure reconfirms the need for country resolutions to monitor gross and systematic human rights violations. The effectiveness of the 1503 Confidential Procedure has often been questioned due to the lack of transparency. If the CHR’s influence is to be enhanced, all proceedings, reports and decisions under the 1503 Confidential Procedure must be made public after a certain period of time.

Open sessions of the CHR have also been marked by increasing acrimony over allegations of politicisation and selectivity. The United States’ biased attitude towards Israel and its allies in the Middle East and unilateral coercive measures against Cuba often dilute genuine concerns about the systemic human rights violations on the countries on which draft resolutions are being sponsored: Cuba, China, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Chechnya of the Russian Federation, Democratic Republic Congo, Burundi, Myanmar and Turkmenistan.

When the CHR votes on country resolutions under agenda item 9, China will set the tone by using its infamous procedural tactic – “No Action Motion” to block even the explanation for sponsoring the resolution. As none expects that resolution on human rights situation in China will be adopted, the question of human rights situation in China has been reduced to whether the United States will be able to cross the Chinese “No Action Motion” hurdle. Zimbabwe, having tasted blood at the 58^th session at the height of oppression by the Mugabe regime, once again will use the “no-action motion”. If the European Union is serious about the resolution on the human rights situation in Zimbabwe, it must address the issue of land reforms while condemning illegal methods and gross human rights violations by President Mugabe’s regime and the ruling Zanu-PF militias. Cuba, which developed mastery over rules of procedures, is unlikely to be left behind. With the ties of Islamic Umma also being selective, the Organisation of Islamic Countries (OIC) will lend full support to the Russian Federation on the draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Chechnya of the Russian Federation.

Although UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in his address to the 60^th session of the Commission on Human Rights on 7 April 2004 urged the urgent need to address the conflict situation in Darfur including military interventions after exhaustion of all measures, Sudan is likely to obtain support from Malaysia, China and India given the involvement of the state-owned oil companies of China’s China National Petroleum Corp., Malaysia’s Petronas (Petrolium Nasional Berhad) and India’s Oil and Natural Gas (ONGC) Videsh Ltd in the exploration of oil in Sudan. These state-owned Oil companies from Asia replaced the Talisman Energy Inc. of Canada and Lundin Oil AB of Sweden, which withdrew in 2002 amidst allegations of complicity in human rights violations. The 59^th session failed to censure Sudan under agenda item 9 and was rewarded with technical cooperation programmes under agenda item 19. Under the prevailing circumstances, resolutions on the Democratic Republic Congo, Burundi, Myanmar and Turkmenistan are unlikely to see any substantive new elements.

The country resolutions are also linked with the resolutions under agenda item 19 on technical cooperation programmes. The draft resolution on technical cooperation assistance to Nepal sponsored by Switzerland has so far failed to make any progress. Most Asian countries opined to support the resolution only if Nepal agrees. Nepal, which heavily depends on external aid, does not oppose the technical cooperation per se but opposes a report to the Commission either by the High Commissioner for Human Rights or a Special Representative/Rapporteur on its human rights record. It wants the money without any monitoring. A chairman statement which also acknowledges empty 25 point programmes on human rights announced by Nepal is being negotiated at present. In all likelihood, Nepal, which is caught in serious conflict with the Maoists, will join the post conflict countries such as Timor Leste, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Cambodia and Sierra Leone to receive technical cooperation from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). As the conflict intensifies in Nepal with no clear sign of Nepal’s acceptance of the UN mediation for bringing an end to the civil war, a Chairman’s statement will make a mockery of the prevailing conflict and human rights situations in Nepal.

While the LMG, OIC and the Arab League consistently raised the issue of politicisation, selectivity and western domination, there is relative silence as another war unfolds in Iraq. If Saddam Hussein’s repression is the main raison d’etre for the occupation of Iraq, undoubtedly there are many countries, which would qualify for foreign occupation! Despite the fact the situation in Iraq is increasingly turning akin to the occupied Arab territories of West Bank and Gaza, the focus on Iraq remains only on past offences under Saddam Hussein’s regime. Accountability is not revenge; it is not retribution. It is the assertion of the civil society that barbaric methods of law enforcement will be dealt with the full force of the law. Therefore, those who violate human rights and fundamental freedoms – whether Saddam Hussein or the Coalition forces – must be held accountable. The need for protection of the civilians and monitoring of the present violations of human rights and humanitarian laws by parties in conflict in Iraq are of paramount importance. However, the European Union which sponsored the resolution on the situation of human rights in Iraq at the height of the conflict in 2003, has decided not to sponsor a similar resolution. The Asian bloc is reportedly examining whether it has a backbone to bring last minute surprise to sponsor a resolution on the situation of human rights in Iraq. The CHR is all set to shame itself by its failure to sponsor a resolution on the situation of human rights in Iraq.

On thematic resolutions, New Zealand, which usually sponsors the resolution on the Working Group on Indigenous Populations, has refused to do so at the 60^th session. As stated in our previous ACHR Features, the review by the Secretary General in 2003 (E/2003/72) did not expressly stress the distinctiveness of the WGIP or the need to continue its work. Although, the Sub-Commission already requested the Economic and Social Council to authorise the Working Group on Indigenous Populations to meet for five working days prior to the fifty-sixth session of the Sub-Commission in 2004, Cuba has decided to sponsor the resolution on the WGIP.

The LMG views the Secretariat i.e. OHCHR including voluntary funds to the Secretariat as part of “politicisation and selectivity”. The LMG therefore sponsors a resolution on the composition of the staff of the OHCHR (2003/74). China has reportedly decided to seek direct implementation of this resolution and demanded from the Acting High Commissioner Bertie Ramcharan to appoint one Chinese staff and reportedly secured guarantees for one post at the OHCHR. The government of China does not consider the present Chinese staff of the OHCHR as “Chinese nationals” because they have been living outside of China for a long period of time even though they hold Chinese passports. After all, China questions universality of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights even though P C Chang of China was one of two vice chairs on the Drafting Committee of the UDHR chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt. Chang who was concerned that the UDHR should not reflect too parochial a view of human rights stated "It (UDHR) should incorporate the ideas of Confucius as well as Thomas Aquinas." Yet, China often dismissed Chang as western educated, as he did not belong to the Communist Party. To the LMG, the implementation and evaluation of the Technical Cooperation Projects with China by the cadres of the Communist Party of China will be non-political and impartial!