The US should make joining the UN Human Rights Council a priority
(Christian Science Monitor, December 10, 2008)
Washington – After eight years of neglect, President-elect Barack Obama is eager to have the United States re-engage with the United Nations. A good way to begin would be to join the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
President Bush snubbed the preeminent international human rights policymaking body when it was established in 2006, with disastrous results. A speedy reversal by Mr. Obama would give hope to moderate governments that yearn for a stronger UN human rights program. It would also invigorate the entire UN system, generate goodwill, and encourage others to help with tough policy challenges like Guantanamo Bay.
There is no time to be lost.
Dec. 10 is the 60th anniversary of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but it will not be much of a celebration. The UN’s human rights program has been badly weakened by an ill-advised reform and by America’s absence from the Human Rights Council.
Until 2006, UN human rights policy was made by the Human Rights Commission, a body of 53 governments that included Sudan and Zimbabwe. Sudan’s membership, at the peak of the genocide in Darfur, caused outrage in Washington and prompted calls for reform. The commission was voted out of existence in 2005 and replaced by the council.
The problem is that no governments have clean hands when it comes to human rights, so basing election to the council on good behavior would have excluded most of the world’s powerful governments. That would not have been credible.
As a result, the new council was organized along the lines of the much-maligned commission, into five regions. The big difference was that Africa and Asia each received almost twice as many seats as the West in the horse-trading. This was a recipe for mischief, and the Bush administration made it worse by declining even to apply for membership.
In the three years since, hapless Western governments have been consistently outmaneuvered and outvoted on the council. They suffered a particularly serious reverse in March this year, when Islamic governments weakened a key UN inquiry into freedom of expression.
Even more damaging has been the steady erosion of independent “rapporteurs” who follow the record of individual governments. Their reports have long been the gold standard for international human rights monitoring, but such finger-pointing against individual governments could soon be a thing of the past.
The African bloc has insisted – successfully – that any country monitors be approved by the government under review, and the rapporteurs for Cuba, Belarus, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Liberia have all been retired. This means, incredibly, that the UN has no formal process for monitoring human rights in eastern Congo, which is in the throes of a deadly conflict. Many predict that the days may be numbered even for the UN’s rapporteur on Sudan, which triggered the whole reform in the first place.
In place of these country inquiries, the council has established a process that is both bureaucratic and toothless. Known as the “Universal Periodic Review,” it requires that all UN member governments submit to a three-hour review by the council every four years. This puts zero pressure on violators.
All of this represents a sweeping retreat from the 1990s, when 15 governments were subject to critical public appraisal by the UN. Country-specific inquiries may have unfairly penalized weak governments. But in this age of genocide, the pendulum has surely swung too far in the wrong direction.
Can the trend be reversed? Yes, but it will require vision. This should not be difficult. All governments understand that global challenges such as climate change and recession will put immense pressure on the weak and require a strong human rights response from the UN.
Such a vision will need a strategy. The US should start by courting moderate governments that feel obliged to vote with their regions but could probably be persuaded to support a less politicized approach. Many have greeted Obama’s election with relief, but to take advantage of their goodwill, his team must propose a practical agenda instead of lamenting the council’s shortcomings. This should start with a commitment to abide by international standards of behavior. There can be no more preaching human rights and practicing torture.
Second, the US should call for an overhaul of the Universal Periodic Review. It desperately needs independent oversight.
Finally, Obama and his nominee for UN Ambassador, Susan Rice, should appoint a delegate with a proven commitment to human rights. Such an agenda would require an investment in diplomatic capital. But it would also produce a huge return – for the US and for human rights.
• Iain Guest is an adjunct professor at the School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, where he teaches human rights. He also directs the Advocacy Project, an NGO in Washington that supports community-based human rights groups.
Filed under: Uncategorized
[...] Obama’s moment on human rights The US should start by courting moderate governments that feel obliged to vote with their regions but could probably be persuaded to support a less politicized approach. Many have greeted Obama’s election with relief, … [...]
Human Rights in Larger Freedom
Rene Wadlow*
Our age which has often been so cruel, can now pride itself on having witnessed the birth of a universal human rights movement. In all walks of life brave individuals are standing up for their brothers who have been reduced to silence by oppression or poverty. Their struggle has transcended all frontiers, and their weapon is knowledge…Defending human rights today means above all bringing the most secret crimes to light. It means trying to find out and daring to speak out with complete objectivity, something which requires courage and occasionally, even heroism… The United Nations is cognizant that, for human rights to be more fully recognized and respected, the awareness and support of all are required. Javier Perez de Cuellar
As we mark the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10 December — marking the day in 1948 when the Declaration was adopted in Paris, it is inevitable that we look at the large gap between the aims and the practice. It is easy to grow cynical at governmental double standards, politically selective hypocrisy and tactical alliances. Yet success in the human rights field depends on a continuing commitment to outwit those who have a vested interest in keeping the UN weak and unable to act effectively. It is important to note the land marks of progress. These are some of the victories where intense effort and creative cooperation among representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), UN Secretariat, independent experts, and a few representatives of progressive governments created awareness, got resolutions adopted, and built structures for follow up. Each case would merit a fuller analysis and character sketches of some of the players, but that would be a book rather than an article.
I list 10 victories which seem to me to be real advances. Others would no doubt make different lists, but as an NGO representative to the UN in Geneva, I had participated in each of these advances and knew the key players. Governments, who alone have the ability to vote UN resolutions in the end, happily take credit for advances. Yet in these cases, progress was made by ideas coming from NGO representatives, helped by UN Secretariat who must keep a “low profile” and the representatives of some governments where an issue touched them personally — and did not go against their government’s policy.
1) Awareness of the rights and conditions of indigenous and tribal populations. When this issue was first raised in the early 1980s “indigenous” were considered to be only the Indians of North America who had come in force to present their case in Geneva. Some governments finally went along thinking that such analysis would be a subtle criticism of the USA without costing them anything. However, the International Labour Organization Convention N° 109 on indigenous peoples speaks of “indigenous and tribal”. Thus, it was possible to raise issues of tribal groups in south-east Asia such as the Chakma of Bangladesh, who are not “indigenous” having migrated from south China over the last 2000 years but have a tribal society. Much of the advances in the field are due to the skills and dedication of Ms Erica Daes who for many years chaired the Working Group on Indigenous Populations. Now, the indigenous and tribal issues cover a wide number of countries and have moved to center stage.
2) Torture. When the use of torture was first raised in 1973, it was thought to be a rare practice limited to a small number of countries. It turns out that it is, in fact, widely used by a large number of countries. Getting torture to be a recognized issue and having the Commission on Human Rights create the post of Special Rapporteur on Torture owes much to Sean MacBride (1904-1988) at the time chairman of the Amnesty International Executive Committee (1961-1974) and Nobel Peace Prise laureate (1974). MacBride had been the Foreign Minister of Ireland (1948-1951) and knew how governments work. He had also been a long-time member of the Irish Republican Army (1917-1936) and knew well how police as well as insurgencies work. MacBride called torture an ‘epidemic’ perpetrated by regimes ‘to control dissent and maintain power.’ The well-organized campaign against torture brought together numerous NGOs to pressure governments in the UN General Assembly to take action.
3) Death Penalty. The efforts for the abolition of the death penalty also owe much to Amnesty International and its long-time Secretary-General Martin Ennals. His role, often in the background but always on key issues, is an example of how NGO impact can be made.
4) Conscientious objection to military service. Conscientious objection as a human rights was a long but successful fight on the part of a small number of NGOs such as the Quakers, the Fellowship of Reconciliation and the International Peace Bureau. It was led by the representatives of Ireland, Canada and Austria — all of which have armies but whose representatives went “that extra mile” to overcome opposition and get the resolution passed.
5) Child Soldiers. The attention now given to the human rights violations from the existence of child soldiers — both the fact that children are taken as soldiers and the human rights violations that they are forced to commit was brought to the attention of the Commission on Human Rights by the Quakers and the NGO Defense for Children. This led to the creation of a Special Representative on Children in Conflict as well as attention at the UN Security Council and the International Criminal Court.
6) The Right to Housing. The right to housing and especially the destruction of houses in the process of slum clearing, often done without re-housing, owes its place on the human rights agenda to a small number of NGOs but who had dramatic examples of abuses. There is now an active Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing.
7) Freedom of Religion and Belief. It was a 20-year effort to get the adoption in 1981 of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance Based on Religion or Belief. It was an effort kept alive by a small number of States and NGOs. It is not sure that as far-reaching and complete a Declaration could be drafted today. The Declaration serves as a guideline for the right to belief in many of the current religious-based tensions.
8) The Rights of Women. It is always strange how difficult it is to get proper attention to the rights and condition of women since they are half and probably more of humanity. Nevertheless, it has been a long effort largely carried by NGOs. It is a multifaceted effort and was helped by a series of UN-sponsored conferences on women. Geneva-based NGOs such as the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom have played key roles. The concept that women exist and thus have rights has brought together NGOs who are often divided on other issues.
9) Systematic rape. The awareness of systematic rape as a crime against humanity has grown as part of the broader effort on the equality of women mentioned in point 8. Many of the NGOs concerned with equality of women have been concerned with domestic violence as well. Thus, they reacted strongly to reports of systematic rape during the conflicts in former Yugoslavia. This issue has also been raised concerning the conflict in Darfur, Sudan, and in the eastern provinces of the Democratic Republic of Congo.
10) Human Rights Defenders. I leave for last our auto-defense: the efforts to protect human rights defenders on the front lines. Raising human rights issues in a good number of countries can get you into trouble. Even writing to Amnesty International is not a danger-free practice in some places. The killing in Moscow of Anna Politkovskaia, a journalist critical of the conflict in Chechena, is there as a symbol of all those on the front lines of human rights efforts. Thanks to NGO efforts, the UN has created a Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders — a constant reminder to governments and in some cases non-governmental militias that they are being watched
All these victories are fragile, and there are governments who would want them reversed or forgotten. But on Human Rights Day, we can welcome these advances, remember those whose drive, skills and determination helped bring forward these issues which many would have left in the dark. We need to prepare for the next battles which are not far away.
Rene Wadlow, Representative to the UN, Geneva, Association of World Citizens
It is crucial indeed that the US under its new administration join a.s.a.p. the UN Human Rights Council which may help that the Council would not fall further back below the level of the “achievements” of its predecessor.Participation is always better than remainig aloof. Your urgent appeal is most welcome and hopefully it will be heeded.