Vietnam Archives - UN Watch

Report rejects Algeria, Sudan, Venezuela, Vietnam for top U.N. human rights posts

unwatch — Mon, 03 Oct 2022 08:51:04 +0000

NEW YORK, October 3, 2022 – Ahead of next week’s UN election of 14 nations to its highest human rights body, a coalition of non-governmental human rights groups from Europe, the U.S. and Canada today called on UN member states to oppose the election of Afghanistan, Algeria, Sudan, Venezuela and Vietnam, which were deemed “unqualified” due to their human rights records as well as their voting records on UN resolutions concerning human rights.

Abuses by those candidates are detailed in a new joint NGO report published today by UN Watch, Human Rights Foundation and the Raoul Wallenberg Center for Human Rights, which is being circulated to UN diplomats.

The report will be launched today at a press conference next to the United Nations in New York, one week before the General Assembly votes on October 11th, featuring human rights activists and experts, including Rodrigo Diamanti on Venezuela, Mutasim Ali on Sudan, Zineb Riboua on Algeria, and Dan Hoang on Vietnam.

Because there is no competition in the African regional group, with four candidates for four available seats, Algeria and Sudan, both rated as “Not Free” by Freedom House, are almost guaranteed to win, unless member states make the exceptional move of refusing to endorse candidates running on a clean slate.

There is competition in the Latin American group, with Chile, Costa Rica and Venezuela vying for two available seats. Venezuela is a current member and is running for re-election.

“Electing Venezuela’s Maduro regime once again as a UN judge on human rights, at a time when its top leaders are accused of ordering torture and other atrocities, would be a slap in the face to millions of Venezuelans suffering from human rights abuses, as well as to millions more who were forced to flee the failed state,” said Hillel Neuer of the Geneva-based UN Watch.

Irwin Cotler, head of the Raoul Wallenberg Center for Human Rights, and former Canadian minister of justice, added: “Regrettably, when the UN itself ends up electing human rights violators to the Human Rights Council, it indulges the very of culture of impunity it is supposed to combat. The world’s democracies must join in the preservation and protection of the Council’s mandate, and not end up accomplices to its breach.”

Despite the lack of competition in each regional group, Neuer emphasized that there is a myth among UN diplomats that they are obliged to vote for all candidates on a clean slate.

“As made clear in our report, voting nations can and should refrain from electing rights abusers to the UN’s highest human rights body. We need to hear the US and EU member states lead the call to oppose the worst abusers. So far, at least in the public arena, they have been silent.”

The report also listed Bahrain, Bangladesh, Georgia, Maldives, Morocco and South Africa as having “questionable” credentials, due to problematic human rights and UN voting records that should be improved.

“Sadly, all signs are that the UN will disregard its own rules and principles on October 11th by rubber-stamping the election of Algeria and Sudan — even though these regimes systematically violate the human rights of their own citizens,” said Neuer, “and consistently frustrate UN initiatives to protect the human rights of others.”

“We hope that at least for the Latin American race, we will see countries reject Venezuela’s absurd candidacy.”

Currently, two thirds of the UNHRC members are non-democracies, including China, Libya, Qatar, Cuba, Eritrea, Khazakhstan and Venezuela.

UN Watch is proposing a major reform to the election system. “If our own democracies continue to disregard the election criteria by voting for abusers,” said Neuer, “then we should just scrap elections altogether, and make every country a member, as is the case in the General Assembly’s human rights committee. Non-democracies could no longer hold up their UNHRC election as a shield of international legitimacy to cover up the abuses of their regime.”

“Regrettably,” said Neuer, “the EU has not said a word about hypocritical candidacies that only undermine the credibility and effectiveness of the UN human rights system. By turning a blind eye as human rights violators easily join and subvert the council, leading democracies will be complicit in the world body’s moral decline.”

“It will be an insult to their political prisoners and many other victims — and a defeat for the global cause of human rights — if the UN helps gross abusers act as champions and global judges of human rights. When the UN’s highest human rights body becomes a case of the foxes guarding the henhouse, the world’s victims suffer,” said Neuer.

Why in tomorrow's elections the United Nations should NOT elect #Venezuela's Maduro regime—which commits widespread atrocities against its own people, causing 5 million to flee—to the UN Human Rights Council. @RDiamanti at our @UNWatch @hrf @TheRWCHR event:https://t.co/GBPUGIv7Dm

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) October 10, 2022

The post Report rejects Algeria, Sudan, Venezuela, Vietnam for top U.N. human rights posts appeared first on UN Watch.

UN: Venezuela fails to silence political prisoners' appeal for amnesty

unwatch — Fri, 24 Jun 2016 19:09:03 +0000

Edgardo Toro, Venezuelan delegate to the UNHRC

GENEVA, June 24, 2016 — Venezuela was overruled by the chair of the UN human rights council today, when its delegate interrupted a UN speech (see below) in a failed bid to stop the reading of an appeal for council members to release political prisoners on the occasion of the council’s 10th anniversary.
The appeal, signed by family members of political prisoners in Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, Venezuela, Vietnam and Cuba, was read out today in the plenary of the council by Hillel Neuer, executive director of the Geneva-based UN Watch, a non-governmental human rights group.
Venezuela’s delegate interrupted as soon as Neuer mentioned the name of jailed opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez. “We do not think it is appropriate to raise specific countries,” he said, even though virtually all of the previous 15 NGO speeches had done exactly that.
However, the objection was shot down with uncommon firmness by the session chair, who strongly defended UN Watch’s right to speak. “I have the impression that the speaker was perfectly in the context of this agenda item. We are all in favor of participation of civil society, and this was just a civil society group expressing itself,” he said.
Many UN diplomats who chair session are leery of siding with activists when it could upset country delegates.

__________

Appeal for Amnesty of Political Prisoners

Testimony before the UN Human Rights Council, delivered by UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer, June 24, 2016.
Mr. President, this session marks the council’s 10^th anniversary, which it has celebrated with a high level event gathering all presidents from the past ten years, with concerts, and with ceremonial flags flying on the Mont Blanc bridge, overlooking Lake Geneva.
United Nations Watch takes the floor today to make a special appeal. We do so in the name of family members of political prisoners worldwide who have declared their support:

Ensaf Haidar, wife of Raif Badawi, blogger, political prisoner in Saudi Arabia
Anastasia Zotova, fiancée of Ildar Dadin, human rights activist and political prisoner in Russia
Ti-Anna Wang, daughter of Wang Binzhang, pro-democracy leader, political prisoner in China
Lilian Tintori, wife of Leopoldo López, opposition leader, political prisoner in Venezuela
Dang Ngoc Minh, mother of Nguyen Dang Minh Man, journalist, democracy activist and political prisoner in Vietnam
Yunisleisi Soto Garcia, wife of Alexander Palacio Reyes, democracy activist and political prisoner in Cuba

We believe there can be no better way for the council to celebrate its anniversary than to announce a decision—one that would embody the values of founding Resolution 60/251, which reaffirmed that all States, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, have the duty to promote and protect all human rights.
A decision that would embody the Article 9 guarantee of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
A decision that would embody the solemn undertaking of Member States of the Council to uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights, and to fully cooperate with the Council and its mechanisms, which includes the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which has repeatedly called for the release of all political prisoners.
Therefore, given that—despite all of the above—numerous Member States of the Council continue to arbitrarily imprison human rights defenders, journalists, opposition leaders, dissidents, bloggers, and democracy activists, who are detained under criminal charges as a way to impair the exercise of their basic human rights, and to silence them,
We hereby appeal to all Member States of the Council to honor their obligations, and—to show that this 10th anniversary is not just about concerts and flags, but about human beings—to issue an amnesty, and release all political prisoners forthwith.

The post UN: Venezuela fails to silence political prisoners' appeal for amnesty appeared first on UN Watch.

UN silences group seeking human rights in Vietnam

unwatch — Sun, 31 Jan 2016 05:08:19 +0000

The UN’s 19-member committee that oversees non-governmental organizations voted overwhelmingly to silence a human rights group fighting oppression in Vietnam, in violation of the UN’s own freedom of expression and association guarantees under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The vote was 13-4, with only Greece, Israel, the U.S. and Uruguay voting to support the human rights group.
Those voting to censor the group were: Azerbaijan, Burundi, China, Cuba, India, Iran, Mauritania, Nicaragua, Pakistan, South Africa, Sudan, Turkey, Venezuela. Russia abstained, while Guinea was absent. The UN’s summary is here.
ISHR reports:

A group of States led by Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela has succeeded in a UN vote to deny an NGO the right to respond to questions and allegations against it. In a move that the United States described as sending ‘a chilling message that free speech is under threat at the UN’, a majority of States in the UN Committee on NGOs voted in favour of silencing Khmers Kampuchea-Krom Federation (KKF), a US-based NGO. KKF is applying for ‘ECOSOC consultative status’ through the NGO Committee, a designation which is required for an NGO to be permitted to access and participate in many UN meetings.

The post UN silences group seeking human rights in Vietnam appeared first on UN Watch.

Human Rights Council should reject report on Vietnam

zadmin — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 08:00:06 +0000

UN Watch Statement

Human Rights Council

Item 6: UPR Report of Vietnam

Delivered by Dang Xuong Hung

Thank you, Mr. President.
My name is Dang Xuong Hung and I am the former Consul of Vietnam in Geneva, and the former Deputy Director of the Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I had been a member of the Communist Party since 1986. I abandoned my post and left the Party in October 2013 in order to denounce the human rights violations.
In the report before us, the government of Vietnam affirms that “it has been the consistent policy of Vietnam to respect, protect and promote all fundamental human rights and freedoms.”
Nothing could be further from the truth. There has never been any political freedom; no one can run for office if they are not pre-selected by the Party. Democratic candidates who attempt to run for election are denied. Furthermore, harassment – and even imprisonment – awaits them.
Dissidents and bloggers are harassed, very often savagely beaten by thugs appointed by the police. Tortures in police stations are common. One in 18 people works for homeland security, with the sole aim of monitoring fellow citizens and oppressing human rights. Those in power have publicly sworn to silence anyone who attempts to create opposition groups.
The Communist Party is determined to maintain the dictatorship at any cost and by any means. The stronger the aspiration for democracy, the more brutal the repression. Young girls and boys, guilty only of pacifistically expressing their opinions, are sentenced to five or six years in prison.
Mr. President, I urge the Council to reject today’s report; it is full of lies. I ask the Council to take an active stance and hold the Vietnamese government accountable.
Thank you, Mr. President.

The post Human Rights Council should reject report on Vietnam appeared first on UN Watch.

Vietnam blocks journalist from attending UN review of its human rights record

unwatch — Sun, 02 Feb 2014 16:05:44 +0000

PRESS RELEASE
GENEVA, February 2, 2014 – Pham Chi Dung, a respected independent journalist and civil society advocate, was blocked by Vietnamese authorities from leaving the country yesterday evening to attend events in Geneva during the UN Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) on Vietnam. He was to be a featured speaker at a UPR side event on February 4th titled “With Membership Comes Responsibility: Ensuring Human Rights in Vietnam.”
Pham Chi Dung, possessing a valid Vietnam passport and Swiss visa, was prevented by police from boarding his flight at Tan Son Nhat airport in Saigon on February 1st. According to Mr. Dung, authorities seized his passport and stated that his participation at the United Nations would be “harmful to the human rights image of Vietnam.”
“We are alarmed at the Hanoi government’s attempt to silence Pham Chi Dung,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, the Geneva-based human rights organization which invited Mr. Dung.
“Vietnam is violating one of the stated principles of the UN review process, that of ensuring the participation of all relevant stakeholders, including non-governmental activists. We therefore urge the Human Rights Council and UN High Commissioner Navi Pillay to speak out against this gross breach, and to defend Vietnam’s courageous champions of human rights.”
Organizers of the UPR side event will arrange for Pham Chi Dung’s message to be presented at the United Nations even if he cannot physically attend.
“Only authoritarian governments deny citizens their freedom of travel and right to free expression. We expect the international community to be even more eager to hear Pham Chi Dung’s views on the challenges facing civil society in Vietnam,” said Duy Hoang, spokesperson for Viet Tan, a Vietnamese pro-democracy organization and co-host of the UPR side event.
Pham Chi Dung is an independent journalist and researcher whose work has appeared in prominent publications, including the BBC, Voice of America, Radio Free Asia, and Radio France Internationale. A prolific writer and political essayist, Dung began a literary career in 1986 and continued writing for numerous online publications. A Communist Party member for 20 years, he made headlines when he publicly quit the party in December 2013, calling for a multiparty system. Pham Chi Dung holds a doctorate in economics.
This side event is supported by: ARTICLE 19, COSUNAM, Human Rights for Vietnam PAC, Lawyers for Lawyers, Media Legal Defence Initiative, PEN International, UN Watch, and Viet Tan.
Details
With Membership Comes Responsibility: Ensuring Human Rights in Vietnam
What: UPR Side Event
When: February 4th, 12:30pm – 2:30pm
Where: Palais Des Nations, Room XXV

The post Vietnam blocks journalist from attending UN review of its human rights record appeared first on UN Watch.

Top EU Lawmakers Urge Own Governments to Oppose China, Russia, Cuba, Saudi Arabia in UN Rights Council Election

unwatch — Thu, 07 Nov 2013 14:38:55 +0000

PRESS RELEASE
BREAKING DEVELOPMENT: JORDAN PULLS OUT, CREATING ‘CLEAN SLATE’ FOR CHINA, SAUDI ARABIA & VIETNAM
GENEVA, November 7, 2013 – Top European lawmakers today called on their own governments to oppose China, Russia, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and other “manifestly unworthy” countries running in next Tuesday’s election of 14 new member states to the UN’s 47-nation human rights council. See text below.
According to an exclusive report today by UN Watch, Jordan has pulled out of the race, which means that Asian group candidates China, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam no longer face any competition.
Today’s open appeal, organized by the Geneva-based human rights group UN Watch, was sent today by an international coalition of 30 MPs and human rights activists to all EU governments, as well as to EU foreign affairs commissioner Catherine Ashton.
Signatories include European Parliament Vice-President Edward McMillan-Scott, Elmar Brok, Chair of the European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs, and former Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt, who now heads the European Parliament’s Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) party.
Other legislators joining the appeal include Baroness Deech of the British House of Lords, Baroness Ludford of the European Parliament, Canadian MP and former justice minister Irwin Cotler, and Emanuelis Zingeris, Lithuanian MP and head of the global Parliamentary Forum for Democracy.
Diplomats had predicted some difficulty for the Saudi bid, with UN delegates still upset over Riyadh’s surprise rejection of its Security Council seat. Now with a closed slate, however, the Saudis are almost assured of winning a seat on the world body that holds primary responsibility over issues such as women’s rights and religious freedom.
As part of the opposition campaign, UN Watch together with Human Rights Foundation organized a press conference this past Monday at UN headquarters in New York, where they presented a comprehensive report detailing why no less than 12 of 16 candidates fail to meet the UN’s own basic criteria for membership on the human rights council.

The NGO event also featured passionate appeals from some of the world’s most famous human rights dissidents, including blind activist Chen Guangcheng from China, Rosa Maria Paya of Cuba, Ali Al-Ahmed of Saudi Arabia, and Masha Gessen of Russia. (Click here for quotes from the event; and click here for the speech of Chinese dissident Yang Jianli.)
In anticipation of the Nov. 12 elections, UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer warns: “If the UN enables gross abusers to act as champions and global judges of human rights, it will be an insult to the political prisoners and other victims of those regimes. When the UN’s highest human rights body becomes a case of the foxes guarding the henhouse, the world’s victims suffer.
“China, Cuba, Russia, and Saudi Arabia systematically violate the human rights of their own citizens,” said Neuer, “and they consistently vote the wrong way on UN initiatives to protect the human rights of others.”
“For the UN to elect Saudi Arabia as a world judge on human rights would be like making a pyromaniac the fire chief,” said Neuer.
———–
Appeal Against UNHRC Candidacies of Algeria, China,
Cuba, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam
As sent to all UN member states, 7 November 2013.
Excellency,
We, the undersigned members of parliament, human rights activists and non-governmental organizations, call on you to publicly oppose the candidacies of Algeria, China, Cuba, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, for seats on the United Nations Human Rights Council, elections for which will be held on November 12, 2013.
We urge you to take action to defeat these manifestly unworthy candidacies, which threaten to cast a shadow upon the reputation of the Council—and of the United Nations as a whole.
Candidates for the UN Human Rights Council, according to General Assembly Resolution 60/251, are supposed to be countries that “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights.”
Yet it is widely recognized that Algeria, China, Cuba Russia, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam fail to meet these basic membership criteria. They have poor if not abysmal records on human rights protection at home, and on human rights promotion at the UN.
Rather than giving these non-democratic governments influence over vital decision on human rights, we urge you to introduce resolutions at the United Nations to hold these nations accountable, and to condemn their gross and systematic human rights violations.
Silence is complacency. For the sake of millions of victims worldwide who need a credible and effective international human rights body, please do not be silent.
Sincerely,
Edward McMillan-Scott, MEP
European Parliament Vice-President for Human Rights & Democracy
Elmar Brok, MEP
Chair of Committee on Foreign Affairs, European Parliament
Guy Verhofstadt, MEP
Leader of Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE)
Former Prime Minister of Belgium
Baroness Deech
Member of the British House of Lords
Academic, lawyer, bioethicist, former Principal of St Anne’s College, Oxford
Baroness Ludford
Member of European Parliament, UK
Honourable Irwin Cotler, MP
Member of Canadian Parliament, Liberal Party Critic for Rights & Freedoms, International Justice
Former Justice Minister & Attorney General
Emanuelis Zingeris, MP
President of the Parliamentary Forum for Democracy, Lithuania
Matyas Eörsi
Secretary General of the Parliamentary Forum for Democracy, former MP, Hungary
Dr. Mantas Adoménas, MP
Lithuania
Michael Danby, MP
Australia
Egidijus Vareikis, MP
Lithuania
Bi-khim Hsiao
Member of the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan
Hans van Baalen
Member of the European Parliament, Netherlands
Hannu Takkula
Member of European Parliament, Finland
United Nations Watch
Hillel Neuer, Executive Director
Switzerland
Human Rights Foundation
Thor Halvorssen, President
Initiatives for China
Yang Jianli, President
Council for a Community of Democracies
Robert LaGamma, President
The Gulf Institute
Ali AlAhmed
Mothers and Women against Repression, M.A.R. Por Cuba
Sylvia Iriondo, President
Viet Tan
Do Hoang Diem, Chairman

The post Top EU Lawmakers Urge Own Governments to Oppose China, Russia, Cuba, Saudi Arabia in UN Rights Council Election appeared first on UN Watch.

NGOs Release Report Urging EU & US to Oppose China, Russia, Cuba & Saudi Arabia in Next Week's Election to UN Human Rights Council

unwatch — Mon, 04 Nov 2013 14:42:59 +0000

New Report: UNHRC Candidates China, Cuba, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Jordan, Vietnam are “Not Qualified”; Maldives, Morocco, Namibia, South Africa, South Sudan, Uruguay are “Questionable”
GENEVA, November 4, 2013 – As the U.N. prepares to elect 14 nations next week to its highest human rights body, a coalition of non-governmental human rights groups sent a letter today to U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power and EU foreign affairs commissioner Catherine Ashton urging them to oppose the candidacies of China, Cuba, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Jordan, and Vietnam, which were found to be “Not Qualified” under the U.N.’s own membership criteria, in a report being presented right now at a UN breifing in New York before media, diplomats and human rights activists.
The qualifications of Maldives, Morocco, Namibia, South Africa, South Sudan, Uruguay were deemed “questionable” based on problematic human right records or in their UN voting records.
Click here for PDF of the full report.
The evaluations were published today by two non-governmental organizations, the Geneva-based UN Watch and Human Rights Foundation, and are being presented this afternoon at a UN Headquarters briefing before diplomats, journalists, and NGO activists.
“China, Cuba, Russia, and Saudi Arabia systematically violate the human rights of their own citizens,” said UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer, “and they consistently vote the wrong way on UN initiatives to protect the human rights of others.”
“For the UN to elect Saudi Arabia as a world judge on human rights would be like a town making a pyromaniac into chief of the fire department.”
With the release of the report, an international coalition of 20 NGOs and MPs today appealed to the U.S. and the EU to take action.
“Regrettably,” said Neuer, “so far neither the U.S. nor the EU have said a word about hypocritical candidacies that will undermine the credibility and effectiveness of the UN human rights system. By turning a blind eye as human rights violators easily join and subvert the council, leading democracies will be complicit in the world body’s moral decline.”
“It will be an insult to their political prisoners and many other victims — and a defeat for the global cause of human rights — if the UN helps gross abusers act as champions and global judges of human rights. When the U.N.’s highest human rights body becomes a case of the foxes guarding the henhouse, the world’s victims suffer,” said Neuer.
Today’s press briefing by UN Watch and Human Rights Foundation — under way now and being tweeted live here — is featuring courageous champions of human rights pleading against the election of their oppressors:

Chen Guangcheng, a Chinese civil rights activist who escaped house arrest in 2012 after being detained for organizing a lawsuit against Chinese authorities;
Ali al-Ahmed, a Saudi scholar and political analyst who was arrested as a teenager because of his family members’ political activity;
Masha Gessen, a Russian journalist, author, and LGBT rights activist forced to flee her country with her family after a crackdown on same-sex families;
Rosa Maria Payá, a human rights advocate from Cuba leading a campaign to launch an investigation into the death of her father, the late civil society activist Oswaldo Payá; and
Yang Jianli, a Chinese scholar, pro-democracy advocate, and former political prisoner, who presented a petition against China’s bid for a seat on the UNHRC.

Human Rights Foundation president Thor Halvorssen and UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer jointly present their report evaluating the countries that have submitted candidacies for the November 12 election of new members to the UNHRC.
Click here for PDF of the full report.

The post NGOs Release Report Urging EU & US to Oppose China, Russia, Cuba & Saudi Arabia in Next Week's Election to UN Human Rights Council appeared first on UN Watch.

“List of Shame”: World’s Worst Abusers Running for UN Human Rights Council Seats

unwatch — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:52:24 +0000

PRESS RELEASE

UN Watch reveals: Algeria, Chad, China, Cuba, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam expected to win 2014-16 terms on world’s top rights body; Iran & Syria may also be running

GENEVA, July 9 — As a United Nations meeting is today set to hear live campaign pitches (webcast link) from the UK, France and other democracies running for seats on the world body’s Human Rights Council, the Geneva-based non-governmental human rights group UN Watch revealed its “List of Shame” — naming some of the world’s worst abusers who are also running in the Nov. 2013 election and expected to win seats: Algeria, Chad, China, Cuba, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Vietnam. Though unconfirmed, reportedly Iran and Syria may also be running. Click here for full chart of candidates (PDF).

“This is a recipe for disaster,” said UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer. “By electing massive abusers of human rights to the very body charged with protecting them, the UN is about to drop more rotten ingredients into the soup. We should not be surprised by the results.”

The council already includes Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Mauritania, Venezuela, and other countries with dismal human rights records.

UN Watch is already working with dissidents and NGOs from China (photo left), Cuba and Russia to oppose those candidacies. In recent years, UN Watch successfully led international coalitions of MPs and NGOs to block bids by Syria and Sudan. However, most abusers win election. “Politics, not principles, are too often what rule in UN elections,” said Neuer.

“Candidates like Algeria, China, Cuba, Russia and Saudi Arabia have one thing in common: they systematically violate the human rights of their own citizens,” said Neuer, “and they have consistently voted the wrong way on UN initiatives to protect the human rights of others.”

“It’s not only that these governments are unqualified; they are the ones who should be in the dock of the accused, not sitting on high as prosecutor and judge.”

“It is an insult to their victims — and a defeat for the global cause of human rights — when the U.N. allows gross abusers to act as champions and global judges of human rights,” said Neuer.

“When the U.N.’s highest human rights body becomes a case of the foxes guarding the henhouse, the world’s victims suffer.”

Click here for full chart (PDF)

The post “List of Shame”: World’s Worst Abusers Running for UN Human Rights Council Seats appeared first on UN Watch.

The Right to Name And Shame: An Analysis of the Tenure of Former UN High Commissioner Louise Arbour with Recommendations for New High Commissioner Navanethem Pillay

zadmin — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:16:26 +0000

Summary

Click for Full Report (PDF)

The new appointment of Navanethem Pillay as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is an opportunity to reflect upon the requirements, responsibilities and priorities of an international position that stands on the front lines of the struggle for the idea of universally guaranteed individual rights. This report by UN Watch presents the first initial review of the recently concluded—and controversial—tenure of former High Commissioner Louise Arbour. The report draws lessons for the future and offers concrete recommendations for incoming High Commissioner Pillay.

Our examination of Ms. Arbour’s tenure focuses as a case study on her record in issuing official statements that held countries accountable to their human rights obligations, a measure of performance recognized as significant by both critics and defenders of the former UN human rights chief. Examining all of Arbour’s UN statements published in 2007 and 2008, the report’s findings challenge inflated claims made by her critics as well as defenders.

As a broad and indicative sample of her overall tenure, the report (Tables 1 and 3) documents every country criticism published by Arbour on her UN website during 2007 and 2008, in the form of press releases, remarks delivered to the Human Rights Council, public lectures, reports and amicus curiae legal briefs. After each statement, the most salient country criticism by Arbour is featured, followed by a rating of Strong, Moderate or Weak, with additional analysis where relevant. The report also lists the country situations that Arbour did not address during this period (Table 2).

On the one hand, the data disproves the claims of certain critics that Arbour devoted more time to condemning democracies instead of tyrants. In the period examined, Arbour criticized 39 different countries, many of them ruled by regimes with poor records on human rights and democracy, including Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Pakistan, Sudan and Zimbabwe. Out of 79 official criticisms of countries that Arbour issued during this period, only 10 were dedicated to condemning free democracies. The record shows that she was a determined advocate for the adoption of international human rights standards and that she spoke out for many victims around the world.

At the same time, the evidence does not support the inflated claims made by many of her defenders. For example, claims that Arbour “routinely singled out” China and Russia for “fierce criticism” have no empirical basis. On the contrary, a review of all her UN statements issued during 2007 and 2008 shows that Arbour held back from criticizing many countries that wield power and influence at the UN. She was silent, or spoke out no more than once, on systematic human rights abuses committed by China and Russia, both permanent members of the Security Council, and on those committed by Egypt, a country that exercises great influence at the Human Rights Council through its leading position in various UN country groupings. Similarly, Arbour only issued one statement for human rights victims in Angola, Chad, and Kazakhstan, whose very systems deny basic civil and political freedom.

The report’s most disturbing findings, however, are that in the period examined, Arbour published no statements at all for billions of victims residing in 153 countries—many of whose human rights records range from poor to appalling, including Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Burkina Faso, North Korea, Gabon, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Viet Nam and Yemen. Arbour’s oft-repeated mantra was the fight against impunity. It is unfortunate, therefore, that so many serial abusers were granted effective impunity.

Going beyond the empirical study reflected in Table 3, the report also provides an in-depth examination of Arbour’s treatment of selected regions. On Sudan, Arbour spoke out strongly and consistently, defying the Khartoum regime’s powerful supporters. She also was firm in denouncing major abuses by the Burmese regime. On China and Russia, with the exception of certain efforts early in her tenure, Arbour largely held back from issuing public criticisms. This was unjustified, and it is to be hoped that new High Commissioner Pillay will be more outspoken. Arbour was right to hold the U.S. accountable for its record, but her methods, including intervention through amicus curiae legal briefs, may not have been effective.

In the Middle East, Arbour spoke out against certain violations by Iran. However, unlike other high UN officials, she failed to address President Ahmadinejad’s anti-Semitic campaign of Holocaust denial and incitement to genocide. By contrast, upon demands from certain UN alliances, Arbour did issue statements about perceived offenses to Islam, which may have encouraged the Islamic states’ campaign at the UN to curb freedom of speech. On the Arab-Israel conflict, while Arbour’s approach could not be compared to that of the Human Rights Council, her statements were weighted against Israel. With few exceptions, Arbour did not criticize Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria or other countries in the Middle East with highly problematic records.

There is no magic formula for how to criticize countries. However, High Commissioner Pillay should adopt a methodology that will ensure that situations of gross human rights violations around the world are not ignored. In particular, she should address compelling situations neglected by the Human Rights Council, which, despite attempts at reform, is now in a downward spiral. High Commissioner Pillay will need to resist the renewed attempts by repressive regimes on the council to subject her office to their control. She should speak out for the threatened country mandates, and vigorously safeguard the vital role at the council played by experts and NGOs. With the council marred by selectivity and politicization, it is vital for High Commissioner Pillay to use her independence to provide a universal approach based on objective human rights standards.

Sommaire Exécutif

La nomination de Navanethem Pillay au poste très convoité de Haut Commissaire pour les droits de l’Homme de l’ONU représente une occasion unique de réfléchir sur les exigences, les responsabilités et priorités qui découlent de ce poste international, un poste qui se trouve au premier plan de la lutte en faveur des droits individuels garantis pour tous.

Ce rapport de UN Watch présente le tout premier examen du mandat, quelque peu controversé, de la Haut Commissaire Louise Arbour, qui vient de s’achever. En examinant minutieusement le passé récent, le rapport dresse des leçons pour le futur et propose ainsi des recommandations concrètes adressées à la nouvelle Haut Commissaire Pillay.

Notre examen du bilan de Mme. Arbour se concentre sur ses déclarations officielles qui exposent les violations des droits de l’Homme commis par différents Etats. Cette méthode est un moyen significatif de mesurer la performance de la Haut Commissaire sortant, un moyen reconnu à la fois par les détracteurs et les supporters de Louise Arbour. En passant en revue toutes les déclarations officielles de l’ancienne chef des droits de l’Homme en 2007 et 2008 publiées sur le site de l’ONU, le rapport réfute certaines des revendications les plus ardentes faites par, à la fois ses défendeurs et ses critiques.

Le rapport (cf. tableaux 1 et 2) répertorie toutes les critiques formulées par Arbour en 2007 et 2008 concernant différents pays. Ces déclarations, telles qu’elles figurent sur le site Internet de l’ONU sous la forme de communiqués de presse, de discours prononcés au Conseil des droits de l’Homme ou lors de conférences publiques, de rapports, et de mémoires juridiques amicus curiae, représentent un vaste échantillon représentatif de son mandat général.

Après chaque déclaration, les principales critiques exprimées par Arbour sont analysées. Elles sont ensuite répertoriées selon qu’il s’agisse de critiques fortes, modérées ou faibles, et sont accompagnées de remarques supplémentaires le cas échéant. Le rapport énumère également les situations dans des pays spécifiques qu’Arbour n’a pas abordées durant cette période (cf. tableau 3).

D’une part, les données ainsi récoltées réfutent les allégations de certaines critiques qui affirment qu’Arbour a consacré la plupart de son temps à condamner les démocraties plutôt que les tyrans. Pendant la période examinée, Arbour a critiqué 39 pays différents, tels que le Sri Lanka, le Myanmar (anciennement la Birmanie), le Pakistan, le Soudan ou encore le Zimbabwe. Sur 79 de ses critiques officielles des pays, 10 critiques seulement ont condamné les démocraties libres. L’étude montre qu’Arbour s’est avérée être une fervente avocate militant en faveur de l’adoption de standards internationaux des droits de l’Homme. Le rapport révèle également qu’elle a témoigné en faveur de nombreuses victimes à travers le monde.

D’autre part, le rapport réfute aussi les allégations exagérées provenant de beaucoup de ses supporters. Les affirmations selon lesquelles Arbour aurait régulièrement vivement critiqué la Chine et la Russie ne sont pas fondées. Au contraire, un examen minutieux de toutes les déclarations prononcées par Arbour dans le cadre de l’ONU en 2007 et 2008, montre qu’elle s’est abstenue de critiquer de nombreux pays, ces mêmes pays qui jouissent d’un pouvoir et d’une influence considérables au sein de l’ONU. Par exemple, elle a passé sous silence, ou n’est intervenue qu’une seule fois sur, les abus systématiques des droits de l’Homme perpétués par la Chine et la Russie, deux Etats influents, à la fois membres du Conseil de Sécurité et du Conseil des droits de l’Homme, ou encore les violations commises par l’Egypte, un pays qui exerce une influence colossale au sein du Conseil des droits de l’Homme grâce à sa position de leader du groupe africain, de la Ligue arabe, du groupe islamique et du groupe des non alignés.

De même, Arbour n’est intervenue qu’une seule et unique fois en faveur des victimes en Angola, au Tchad et au Kazakhstan, dont les systèmes mêmes rejettent les libertés civiles et politiques fondamentales.

Notre plus grande préoccupation, néanmoins, est qu’Arbour n’a publié aucune déclaration officielle sur la situation des droits de l’Homme dans 153 pays, dont de nombreux pays présentant de mauvais voire d’effroyables bilans en matière de droits de l’Homme, comme l’Algérie, le Bahreïn, le Bangladesh, la Biélorussie, le Burkina Faso, la Corée du Nord, le Gabon, la Jordanie, le Koweït, la Libye, l’Arabie Saoudite, la Syrie, le Viet Nam ou encore le Yémen.

The post The Right to Name And Shame: An Analysis of the Tenure of Former UN High Commissioner Louise Arbour with Recommendations for New High Commissioner Navanethem Pillay appeared first on UN Watch.