The UN Human Rights Council adopted resolutions on Guinea, the DRC and Myanmar this morning. All three were adopted by consensus without a vote.
- The new government of Guinea welcomed the resolution slamming the Sept. 2009 incidents (click here for the resolution text as proposed and here for the final text as orally amended):
The adoption by the council of this resolution is eloquent testimony and expression and solidarity felt towards my country in its difficult progression to democracy and peace. On behalf of the African group to salute the invaluable spirit of the international community. Thanks to change and determination of transitional governmentt, opens up real prospects for coming out of crisis and experiencing prosperity. This is why my delegation believes by adopting this resolution our council will have made a contribution to the Ouagadougou declaration signed. Make a strong appeal to council to adopt draft L.14 by consensus as further evidence of unswerving support of fundamental freedoms.
- The resolution on DRC was weak, and praised the government instead of holding it accountable (click here for the resolution text). The United States and France for the EU expressed dissatisfaction that the DRC resolution does not restablish an independent expert. The text of the resolution on Myanmar was modified minutes before its adoption. Spain for the EU introduced the watered-down text, and made oral revisions to remove “gross” from a statement on violations committed in Myanmar. Though it was not put to a vote, several countries, including Cuba, China and Russia, condemned the adoption of the resolution. Ther DRC welcomed it:
The current draft of the resolution in the DRC presented by Nigeria enjoys the full agreement of my country. As compared with the original text, the present text incorporates the views of the African Group, EU, USA and other members, my country did not accept the introduction because it believes the acceptance today of a field office of the OHCHR whenever they send an invitation it shows our good faith. We consider that the 7 thematic special rapporteurs as they are all on equal footing can not have imposed on a particular method. Call or appeal on L.23 by consensus. Determined to live up to its accommodations.
