Tuesday afternoon saw heated exchanges at the UN General Assembly (GA) as its Third Committee, which oversees human rights issues, debated a package of reforms proposed in June by the Human Rights Council, a subsidiary body of the GA. (Click here or the statement by UN Watch and 26 other NGOs opposing the changes, as reported by Canada’s National Post).
Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman accused the new Human Rights Council of “moral bankruptcy.” The new Human Rights Council, he said, “was delivered by some who thought they were giving birth to a new baby, but they have given birth to a horrendous monster.”
The United States expressed “concern” at the “relentless” campaign against Israel at the Council. However, the Palestinian observer said that the situation in Palestine “had become a ‘test for the West’ regarding its commitment to the human rights.” Cuba, Syria and Iran also welcomed the Council’s focus on Israel.
Syria, Egypt, Myanmar (Burma), and Iran all voiced support for the proposed “code of conduct” for Special Procedures—a mechanism designed by China, Algeria, and other authoritarian members of the council to cow independent human rights monitors into silence.
Although many countries praised the non-selective nature of the proposed Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism, France and the United States emphasized that it could not replace the need for country-specific actions and investigatory mandates.
For the official UN summary of the debate, click here. Our own highlights follow below.
- Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman delivered scathing remarks, accusing the HRC of “moral bankruptcy.” ”The new Human Rights Council,” he said “was delivered by some who thought they were giving birth to a new baby, but they have given birth to a horrendous monster.” Gillerman noted Council’s 12 one-sided resolutions and three special sessions all targeting Israel while massive human rights violations around the world were ignored. Gillerman also cited that more than half of the 47 members of the HRC are ranked as “not free” or “partially free.”
- The Palestinian observer stated that in 40 years of occupation, the Palestinian people had experienced “serious violations of their human rights.” The observer said that the HRC’s item on the human rights situation in Palestine was of particular importance to the Palestinian people. The observer then quoted John Dugard, stating that the situation in Palestine “had become a ‘test for the West’ regarding its commitment to the human rights…”
- Syria “welcomed” the adoption of the resolution on the violations of human rights in the Syrian Golan and the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
- Myanmar said that country-specific resolutions should have no place on the agenda of the Human Rights Council.
- Syria, Egypt, Myanmar, Iran called for the code of conduct to be strictly followed by all mandate holders.
- The United States expressed “concern” at the “relentless” campaign against Israel at the Council. The US praised the UPR mechanism, but noted that it would be not able to replace country-specific actions and special mandates.
- France noted that human rights problems could not be fully addressed simply with thematic approaches.
- The Netherlands “deplored” the discontinuance of the mandates on Belarus and Cuba.
- Poland expressed its disappointment with the institutional-building package, in particular that not all mandates of the special procedures had been retained.
- Iran expressed “satisfaction” at the HRC’s institution-building package and that it had been “adopted by consensus.”
- Sudan scolded France for raising the issue of Darfur since according to the Sudanese government, Sudan had made “great efforts” to end the suffering of the people of Darfur.
