Libyan dissident: “Why is Qaddafi on the Human Rights Council?”; 27 NGOs Launch Campaign to Suspend Libya

Geneva, September 20 — A week into its controversial new membership on the U.N. Human Rights Council, Libya clashed with the U.S. today after the representative of the Qaddafi regime lashed out at speeches by victims of Libyan abuses and requested that the council president delete their remarks from the record, which included a challenge to Libya’s qualifications to serve on the UN’s highest human rights body. (See full trancript and links to video below.)

Sparking today’s commotion in the plenary was testimony by Mohamed Eljahmi, brother of the late Fathi Eljahmi, a noted Libyan dissident who died after suffering brutal imprisonment under the Qaddafi regime: “Why is the government of Mr. Qaddafi, which tortured and killed my brother—and which is one of the world’s worst violators of human rights—now an elected member of the UN Human Rights Council?”

Organized by the Geneva-based UN Watch, Eljahmi’s remarks were delivered as part of a new campaign by 27 human rights groups to have Libya suspended from the 47-nation council. Last Thursday, UN Watch arranged for testimony by Kristyana Valcheva, one of the five Bulgarian nurses who were imprisoned and tortured on false charges of poisoning children with HIV, and Ashraf El-Hajouj, the Palestinian doctor who was victimized with them.

After Eljahmi spoke, Libyan representative Ibrahim Aldredi lashed out at “certain irresponsible and imperious-type NGOs” for allegedly making “allegations which are really groundless and contentious.” He told the council president, Sihasak Phuangketkeow of Thailand, that Libya “would like the interventions by such NGOs to be deleted from the record” for being “incompatible with our procedures.”

But the U.S. immediately intervened, rallying to the defense of the victims’ testimony, saying that “accredited NGOs must be permitted to speak, and their speeches (must) be included in the record.”

Jalredi added that “the Libyan Arab Jamahariya under Muammar Al-Qaddafi was honored to be elected to the council, and the positive role of Libya was estimated in Africa and throughout the world with a view to strengthening human rights.”

“We take note of the points you raised,” said the council president, without issuing any ruling on Libya’s request.

The government of Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi took its seat on the council last week, in a 3-week session that concludes on October 1st. Libya now has the power to vote on and influence the definition of women’s rights, mandates on freedom of speech and religion, and an expected two resolutions on Israel. The council was created in 2006 to replace the discredited Human Rights Commission, which earned scorn when Libya was elected as chair in 2003.

__________________________

(From today’s debate)

“Why is Qaddafi on the Human Rights Council?”
UN Human Rights Council, 15th Session
Testimony by Mohamed Eljahmi
on behalf of Freedom House and UN Watch
Geneva, 20 September 2010

Mr. President,

This Council was created with the promise to elect countries that promote and protect human rights.

We ask: Does the UN’s election of Libya live up to this promise?

For me, this question is not academic. My late brother, Fathi Eljahmi, was a heroic dissident in Libya.

Under the rule of Mr. Qadhafi, membership in political parties or independent labor unions are crimes punishable by death. The fulfillment of citizens’ needs is tied to their absolute loyalty to Mr. Qadhafi.

Ordinary Libyans are accountable to a vast security apparatus. Their actions are scrutinized by Orwellian institutions, punishable by ruthless death squads.

Despite the danger, my brother Fathi chose to speak out for free speech and human rights. He was a courageous man. He was also my mentor and a father figure. He was an unconditionally loving and generous husband, son, and brother. Fathi was blessed with a great mind and a passion for equality and justice.

In 2002, he publicly set out his vision for a constitution, free speech, free enterprise, and an investigation into the massacre of 1200 prisoners at Abu Slim.

As a result, the government imprisoned Fathi for 17 months, until then-Senator Biden, who is now the US Vice President, interceded on his behalf. As soon as he was released, Fathi again spoke out for freedom and human rights. Two weeks later, he was sent back to prison, and subjected to five years of intense torture and isolation, leading to his death on May 21, 2009.

My family asks: When will this council establish an international investigation into my brother’s imprisonment, torture and death?

Why is the government of Mr. Qadhafi, which tortured and killed my brother—and which is one of the world’s worst violators of human rights—now an elected member of the UN Human Rights Council?

When will this council do the right thing, and stand with the Libyan people, to defend their human rights?

Thank you, Mr. President.

LIBYA RESPONDS IN RIGHT OF REPLY

Libya (Ambassador Ibrahim Aldredi): Thank you, Mr. President. I am making this statement to respond to the statements by certain irresponsible and imperious-type NGOs which are trying to put the work of the Council and to immobilize people using allegations which are really groundless and contentious.  Mr. President, we would like the interventions by such NGOs to be deleted from the record — last Thursday’s intervention, and some this afternoon. These should be deleted because they are interventions which are incompatible with our procedures.

United States (interrupts with Point of Order): We would like to highlight that the U.S. believes that accredited NGOs must be permitted to speak, and that their speeches be included in the record. As you know, the voices of civil society are extremely important to the work of this council. Though member states, including the United States, may occasionally disagree with the content of their statements, the council should cultivate an environment of openness where we can discuss our differences. Thank you.

Libya: I would state to the honorable Council that this should not be a forum for all sorts of allegations when they are baseless and not grounded in truth. The Libyan Arab Jamahariya under Muammar Al-Qaddafi was honored to be elected to the Council, and the positive role of Libya was estimated in Africa and throughout the world with a view to strengthening human rights. My delegation is fully prepared to cooperate with you, even if other members are not, to promote the work of the council, to ensure it is a genuine forum for protecting fundamental human rights and freedoms.

Human Rights Council President (Ambassador Sihasak Phuangketkeow of Thailand): We take note of the points you raised.

Libya: We are not against the participation of NGOs, only against irresponsible statements by irresponsible NGOs.

See video of debate here

(The following appeal was launched last week by 27 NGOs)

Global NGO Campaign to Remove Libya
from the UN Human Rights Council

The election of the Libyan Arab Jamahariya to the United Nations Human Rights Council is an outrage to the global human rights community. Given its notorious record as one of the world’s worst violators of human rights, the Qaddafi regime’s membership on the Council flies in the face of the United Nations’ promise, enshrined in Resolution 60/251 (2006), to elect member states that are committed to the promotion and protection of human rights.

As a global coalition of non-governmental organizations dedicated to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we refuse to remain silent. We call on the international community to invoke Article 8 of the aforementioned resolution, which provides for the suspension of membership of states that commit systematic violations of human rights, unless and until the Qaddafi regime:

·  Ends its systematic violation of the right to life, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, the right to equality, the right to peaceful assembly, and the right to free political organization;

·  Ends its practices of arbitrary arrest, torture, and discrimination against minorities, in particular, the persecution of two million black African migrants;

·  Acknowledges its crimes committed against the six medical workers, who were framed in 1998 under false charges of poisoning children with HIV, and then imprisoned, tortured, and sentenced to death row; apologizes; and provides full compensation to the six victims;

·  Acknowledges its crimes in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, and ceases to celebrate the convicted Libyan agent who was released from prison last year;

·   Agrees to an international, independent investigation into the imprisonment and torture of Libyan human rights activist and dissident Fathi Eljahmi, resulting finally in his death in 2009; and

·   Agrees to an international, independent investigation into the massacre of an estimated 1200 prisoners of the Abu Salim prison.

Robert Monetti
Victims of Pan Am 103

Hillel Neuer
UN Watch, Switzerland

Dr. Mohamed M. Bugaighis
American Libyan Freedom Alliance

Franck Kamunga
Droits Humains Sans Frontieres

Bart Woord
International Federation of Liberal Youth

Khaled Ghawi
Association of Libya Imal / Libya Future

Mamadi Kaba
African Assembly for the Defense of Human Rights (Raddho-Guinee)

Amina Bouayach
Moroccan Organization for Human Rights (OMDH)

Mike Gesa Munabi
Students for Global Democracy Uganda

Gibreil I. M. Hamid
Darfur Peace and Development Center

Dr. Theodor Rathgeber
Forum Human Rights, Germany

Siaka Coulibaly
Burkina Faso Civil Society Organizations Network for Development

Tilder Kumichii Ndichia
Gender Empowerment and Development

Kok Ksor
The Montagnard Foundation

Ulrich Delius
Society for Threatened Peoples, Germany

Harris O. Schoenberg
UN Reform Advocates

María José Zamora Solórzano
Movimiento por Nicaragua 

Sister Catherine C. Waters
Catholic International Education Office (OIEC)

Sylvia G. Iriondo
Mothers & Women Against Repression

Mrs. C. Gautam
Nepal International Consumers Union

Logan Maurer
International Christian Concern

Obinna Egbuka
Youth Enhancement Organization, Nigeria

Virginia S. Mueller
International Association of Women Lawyers

Dickson Mugendi David Ntwiga
Solidarity House International

Robert Triozzi
Chief, FRDP

Klaus Netter
Main Representative, CBJO

Armand Azoulai
Main Representative, BBI

Dr. Marlette Black
International Presentation Association

The post Libya clashes with U.S., demands UNHRC president ‘delete’ NGO request to eject Qaddafi from U.N. Human Rights Council appeared first on UN Watch.

New York, May 4, 2010 — Two UN watchdog organizations today urged the United Nations General Assembly to reject five candidates for the United Nations Human Rights Council–- Libya, as well as Angola, Malaysia, Mauritania, and Qatar.

In a May 13 election among the UN General Assembly membership, 14 of the 47 seats on the Council will be filled as part of the annual rotation of membership. Member States must receive at least 97 affirmative votes in order to be elected. Each regional group is allotted a number of spaces, and individual countries in those groups can declare themselves to be candidates for those seats.

In a report issued today at the United Nations in New York, UN Watch and Freedom House express particular concern for the lack of qualified candidates from the Africa regional group. “At a time when the ranks of African democracies are growing, it sends a terrible message to the world that a notorious human rights abuser such as Libya appears uncontested on the ballot.” said Thomas O. Melia, deputy executive director of Freedom House. “Africa’s positive political trajectory over the past decade can be better represented than by the current list of candidates, which includes such distinctly non-democratic states such as Angola and Mauritania.”

Candidates considered “not qualified” have sub-par human rights records at home and also have consistently voted against or abstained from resolutions condemning serious human rights violations, including those of North Korea, Sudan and Iran. Two other candidate states deemed “not qualified,” both in the Asian region, are Malaysia and Qatar.

“Freedom House and UN Watch urge all UN General Assembly members not to write in the name of Libya or other unqualified states when filling out the four African slots on their secret ballot,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director, UN Watch. “They should instead write in the names of African countries with far greater qualifications.”

Countries in the Africa regional group deemed “qualified” by the two organizations and could be written in include Cape Verde, Botswana, Mali and Tanzania. Countries in the Asia regional group deemed “qualified” include Papua New Guinea and Micronesia.

“It is our hope that better qualified countries in the Africa and Asia groups would formally declare their candidacies before May 13–-and be encouraged to do so by the United States, the European Union, and the rest of the global community that respects human rights,” said Melia, of Freedom House. “Member states should write in any of these better alternatives instead of the notorious regime of Colonel Qaddafi.”

According to the report, of the 14 candidates announced to date, only 5 are considered to be “qualified” to serve on the Council, including Poland, Spain, Switzerland, Guatemala and Maldives. Additionally, 4 candidates are identified as having “questionable” records, including Moldova, Ecuador, Uganda and Thailand.

To view a copy of the report, click here.

The post Call for Action to Thwart Bid by Libya, and other notorious human rights abusers, to join UN Human Rights Council appeared first on UN Watch.

“The UN Human Rights Council must assume its responsibilities”

Geneva, Dec. 22, 2009 – Fifty human rights groups from around the world today united in calling on UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay to reinstate the mandate for a human rights monitor in Congo, saying the position should never have been eliminated by the UN Human Rights Council in March 2008.

“The latest reports of atrocities in Congo tragically confirm what we desperately warned the UN Human Rights Council about last year,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, a Geneva-based human rights monitoring group that signed the appeal, with 49 other non-governmental organizations from around the world.

The coalition includes 14 African NGOs — from DR Congo, Republic of Congo (Brazzaville), Nigeria, Liberia, Cameroon, Senegal, Zambia, and Burkina Faso — and 36 more from Iran, India, the United States, France, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, and Australia, including representatives from Norwegian Church Aid, the International League for Human Rights and the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims.

“The Security Council is voting this week on extending the Congo peacekeeping mission. The Human Rights Council must likewise assume its own responsibilities and reinstate a dedicated and independent human rights voice for Congo’s suffering victims,” said Neuer.
Widespread executions, torture, arbitrary arrests and rape in the eastern Congo remain a central concern, said the humanitarian groups, citing UN reports of unchecked impunity and a “complete lack of transparency” regarding government exploitation of natural resources. They cited alarming reports of 1,400 civilians killed since the inception of the government’s “Kimia II” military operation.

The UN Human Rights Council eliminated the mandate of the independent expert on Congo in March 2008, under pressure by several of the 47 member states, including Egypt, other Arab and African states, and Russia. The delegates alleged “positive developments in the human rights situation there,” and chastised the UN expert because such “improvements” were allegedly not “duly reflected in [his] report.” Other African states remarked that the Congolese government had established an “environment conducive to the promotion and protection of human rights”, with “serious measures aimed at protecting the realization of economic, social, and cultural rights.”

In November 2008, the UNHRC convened a special session on the human rights situation in Congo, but the outcome resolution was watered down under pressure from African governments and their allies. Calls by UN Watch, Human Rights Watch, and other human rights groups to reinstate the expert went unanswered.

The European Union and Canada formally tabled a measure to reinstate the mandate in the UNHRC’s March 2009 session, but it was defeated on March 27 by a vote of 21-18, with 8 abstentions.

The UN’s expert on extrajudicial executions, Philip Alston, reported last week that civilians in the Congo have been “gang-raped and hacked or shot to death by the Congolese army—the very force that is supposed to protect them.”

Neuer said that this report “only underscores the need for Mr. Ban and High Commissioner Pillay to immediately lead the effort to reinstate a full-time, dedicated human rights monitor on the Congo, who can act as an early warning mechanism and assure international action. It’s time for the UN Human Rights Council to live up to its mission.”

See full text of NGO appeal and list of signatories below.

——————————

Urgent NGO Appeal to Reinstate the UN Independent Expert on Congo

December 22, 2009

Dear UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon,
Dear UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navanenthem Pillay,

We, representatives of non-governmental organizations, reflecting the broad spectrum of international civil society, are appalled to learn of the serious violations committed by the Congolese government in recent weeks, and urge you to call for the immediate reinstatement by the Human Rights Council of an independent human rights expert to monitor, report on and help remedy the dire situation in the Congo.

Summary executions, torture, arbitrary arrests and rape are widespread throughout the country. Recent investigations by the UN Group of Experts show that the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo is increasingly precarious. Its new report, to be discussed at the Security Council this week, describes unchecked impunity and a “complete lack of transparency” regarding government exploitation of natural resources. Other credible reports cite the alarming figure that 1,400 civilians have been killed since the inception of the Kimia II government military operation.

In March 2008, the UN Human Rights Council eliminated the position of the independent expert on Congo after several member states made false claims about the situation on the ground. Tunisia’s Ali Cherif spoke of “the positive developments in the human rights situation there” — indeed, of “remarkable progress” — and chastised the expert because such “improvements” were not “duly reflected in [his] report.” Algeria claimed “significant progress” in the DRC, where “the situation is being normalized.”

Egypt’s Omar Shalaby, on behalf of the African Group, said the DRC boasted an”environment conducive to the promotion and protection of human rights”, with “serious measures aimed at protecting the realization of economic, social, and cultural rights.” He said that “the mandate has not offered clear prospects for improving the human rights situation on the ground”; that it “has not been of benefit to the DRC”; and that “any renewal of the mandate would be counterproductive.” The mandate was one “to which no clear achievement can be attributed.” Russia, among others, supported this line. On these unsubstantiated grounds, the Council then voted to eliminate the UN’s only dedicated independent human rights voice for DRC victims.

Soon after, there were massacres of civilians and increasingly crowded refugee camps with continued fighting between Rwandan rebel forces and the Congolese army. In November 2008, the Human Rights Council convened a special session on the human rights situation in Congo, but to no avail. The European Union was forced to withdraw its draft resolution and compromised on a watered-down text “calling for the immediate end to all human rights violations and unconditional respect for the rights of civilians,” yet making no concrete proposals or recommendations to monitor the situation on the ground. Failing to reinstate an independent expert, the Council also struck the EU’ proposal that the Special Rapporteurs on torture and extrajudicial executions report on the DRC.

Then, in March 2009, an attempt was made by the European Union and Canada “to appoint, for a period of one year, an independent expert.whose tasks will be to provide assistance to the Government.” Their draft text sought to express the gravity of the human rights situation in DRC and to highlight “the recruitment of child soldiers by armed groups and the ongoing and widespread acts of sexual violence against women and children.” Regrettably, this proposal was defeated.

Today, the situation continues to worsen. The UN’s special rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, Philip Alston, has just reported that “civilians have also been gang-raped and hacked or shot to death by the Congolese army — the very force that is supposed to protect them.” Professor Alston’s report lays bare the need for a dedicated expert to monitor the DRC. An early warning system could close the protection gap currently shrouding abuses by the Congolese government.

We urge you to call for and take all necessary action to reinstate the mandate of the independent expert on Congo, eliminated without basis by the UNHRC in 2008, and against the wishes of the victims. The Security Council is now scheduled to vote on a resolution to extend the mandate of the Congo peacekeeping mission. The Human Rights Council should likewise assume its own responsibilities. Civilians remain at high risk in a conflict that has already claimed the lives of 5 million people.

We urge you to act now for the suffering people of the Congo, before it is too late.

Guelord Mbaenda
Executive Director
Action des Jeunes pour le Developpement Communautaire et la Paix (ADECOP)
Democratic Republic of Congo

Madina Athie
President, l’ONG Citoyennes et citoyens Debout
Democratic Republic of Congo

Judge Mukete Tahle Itoe
Global Secretary General
Global Network for Good Governance (GNGG)
Cameroon

African Centre for Democracy and Human Rights Studies (ACDHRS)
Hannah Forster
Executive Director
Gambia

T.Thompson Ade-bayor
Regional Director, Regional Watch for Human Rights
Liberia

Siaka Coulibaly
Executive Secretary
Civil Society Organizations Network for Developpement (RESOCIDE)
Burkina Faso

Deudonne Zognong
Director, Fondation Humanus
President, Cameroon Coalition for the International Criminal Court
Cameroon

Priscilla M Achakpa
Women Environmental programme
Nigeria

Dr. Charles Mwape
President
Hope for Africa International
Zambia

1. Jasper Cummeh, III
   Senior Policy Director
   Actions for Genuine Democratic Alternatives (AGENDA)
   LiberiaChristian Mounzeo
   Président
   Rencontre pour la Paix et les Droits de l’Homme-RPDH
   Congo (Brazzaville)

   Egbuka Obinna
   President
   Youth Enhancement Organization
   Nigeria

Jamils Richard Achunji Anguaseh
Director of Programs
Global Welfare Association – GLOWA
Cameroon

Ibrahima Niang
Director
Mouvement Citoyen
Senegal

Soraya Usmani Martinez
Regional Coordinator, Sub Saharan Africa
International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT)
Denmark

Shomik Chaudhuri
UN Representative
Institute of International Social Development
India

Dr. Ahmed Subhy Mansour
President, The International Quranic Center (IQC)
USA

Robert Arsenault
President
International League for Human Rights
USA

Hillel C. Neuer
Executive Director
United Nations Watch
Switzerland

Greta Zeender
Senior Country Analyst

Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre

Switzerland

Francois Ullmann
President
Ingenieurs du Monde
France

Kamitanji Kabuya
Program Consultant, East Africa
Norwegian Church Aid
Norway

A. Tony Fowke
President
World Federation for Mental Health
Australia

International Multiracial Shared Cultural Organization
USA

Virginia Swain
CEO, Founder
Institute for Global Leadership
USA

Kok Ksor
President
Montagnard Foundation
USA

Teresa Ulloa
Regional Director
Coalition Against Trafficking in Women and Girls in Latin America and the Caribbean
Mexico

John Suarez
Cuban Democratic Directorate
USA

Dr. Vanee Meisinger
Pan Pacific and Southeast Asia Women`s Association of Thailand
Thailand

Lex Grandia
President
World Federation of the DeafBlind
Sweden

Rene Wadlow
Representative to the UN, Geneva
Association of World Citizens and
Association for World Education
Switzerland

Penelope Faulkner, Vice-President
Vietnam Committee on Human Rights
France

Don Kraus
Chief Executive Officer
Citizens for Global Solutions
USA

Ahmad Batebi
Spokesperson
Organization of Human Rights Activists in Iran
Iran

Vo Van Ai, President
Quê Me: Action for Democracy in Vietnam
France

Connie de la Vega
Board of Directors
Human Rights Advocates
USA

Dickson M.D Ntwiga
CEO
Solidarity House International
USA

Sajni M. Thadhani
MPTF Founder & President
Mulchand & Parpati Thadhani Foundation
USA

Wendy Wright
President
Concerned Women for America
USA

Dr. Janice Crouse
Senior Fellow
Beverly LaHaye Institute
USA

Ann Buwalda
Executive Director
Jubilee Campaign
USA

Chidi Nwosu
President
Human Rights, Justice and Peace Foundation
USA

Ulrich Delius
Africa Desk
Society for Threatened Peoples
Germany

Partab Shivani
Executive Director
Skill Enhancing & Research Home of the Children (SEARCH)
Germany

Paul Power
Chief Executive Officer
Refugee Council of Australia
Australia

John Sweeney
Co-ordinator of research
Edmund Rice Centre for Social Justice and Community Education
Australia

Anne Shay
Justice Contact
Presentation Sisters Lismore
Australia

Les Malezer
Chairperson
Foundation for Aboriginal and Islander Research Action (FAIRA)
Australia

Babette Francis
National & Overseas Co-ordinator
Endeavour Forum
Australia

Jonas Karpantschof
Chairperson
European Union of Jewish Students
Belgium

The post 50 Rights Groups Urge UN to Reinstate Congo Monitor appeared first on UN Watch.

Urges U.S. to Reject HRC Resolutions in Today’s General Assembly Vote 

NEW YORK, Dec. 10 — As the UN General Assembly was set today to approve the Human Rights Council’s past year of resolutions, a Geneva-based human rights watchdog called on the U.S. and other democracies to vote in opposition, and claimed in a report that 18 of its key resolutions were contrary to basic human rights principles. Click here for 2009 UNHRC Key Actions chart.

“Paradoxically, as our report today shows, the U.N.’s main human rights body has turned into the world’s leading sponsor of impunity for gross human rights abuses worldwide,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch.

“It’s a case of the foxes guarding the chickens, with countries like China, Russia, Pakistan, Cuba and Saudi Arabia shielding each other’s abuses. Democracies should send a signal by opposing the council’s resolutions, even if they will be outvoted.”

UN Watch analyzed 30 of the key votes by the UN Human Rights Council in the past year, and found that a majority of 18 were counterproductive, including resolutions that praised Sri Lanka after it killed an estimated 20,000 civilians, and that praised Sudan for “progress” on human rights.

Other resolutions sought to restrict the independence of mechanisms that scrutinize countries for violations, such as the office of the High Commissioner and independent monitors.

In addition, UN Watch’s report shows that the council failed to address the world’s worst human rights violations. Of the 20 worst violators on Freedom House’s annual survey, the council censured only Burma (Myanmar) and North Korea.

While it did adopt two resolutions on Sudan, these were non-condemnatory, weak, and ineffective, praising Sudan for its “progress” on human rights. Somalia’s violations were addressed as a matter of mere “technical consideration.”

Even worse, the council failed to adopt any resolution, special session or investigative mandate for Belarus, China, Cuba, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Laos, Libya, Morocco, North Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan or Zimbabwe, all on Freedom House’s list of the world’s worst abusers. Despite ongoing massive abuses in Iran, the council has taken no action whatsoever.

With the exceptions of Burma and North Korea, virtually all of the council’s condemnatory actions in the past year were targeted against Israel, in resolutions that critics say did not address Hamas attacks or the actions of Syria or Iran.

Click here for chart on “2009: How UNHRC Addressed Worst Abusers.”

The post Rights Group: New Report Shows UN Rights Council Shielding Worst Abusers, “Foxes Guarding the Chickens” appeared first on UN Watch.

UN Watch Concerned About Stalled Geneva Bid for Special Session on Sri Lanka Killings

New York, May 12, 2009 — The expected reelection today of China, Cuba, Russia and Saudi Arabia to the U.N. Human Rights Council, despite their much-criticized human rights records, means that, “once again, it will be the foxes guarding the chickens,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, a Geneva-based human rights monitoring group.

Neuer said U.S. engagement with the council “could make somewhat of a difference, if the U.S. acts vigorously to protect principles now under assault, such as freedom of speech, and if it initiates resolutions and special sessions to put a spotlight on genocide in Sudan, religious repression in China, execution of gays in Iran, and other gross abuses that are today being completely ignored.”
Meanwhile, in Geneva, the council’s credibility is at stake as a bid to convene an emergency session on killings by Sri Lanka is failing to muster the needed support of 16 out of 47 council members.

So far, reports UN Watch, 14 have signed on: Argentina, Bosnia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Netherlands, Korea, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, U.K. and Uruguay. But Ukraine, Japan and Chile have not.

Geneva insiders report that Sri Lanka’s ambassador in Geneva is threatening countries with a break in diplomatic relations if they suport the special session.

In New York at the General Assembly today, more than a third of the countries vying for seats on the United Nations Human Rights Council have dismal human rights records that should disqualify them from membership, according to a report released at the U.N. last week by UN Watch and Freedom House.

The report warns that at least four of the eight countries in question—Bangladesh, China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia—are virtually guaranteed seats in today’s election because of a lack of competition from more democratic countries. Click here for new report.

“The U.N. squanders a golden opportunity to promote human rights when it once again chooses the worst offenders to run its highest human rights body,” said Neuer. “This will send absolutely the worst message to victims worldwide — oppressed women in Saudi Arabia, jailed journalists in Cubua — and lend false international credibility to repressive governments that routinely violate the rights of their own citizens.”

Dissidents and former political prisoners from Cuba and Saudi Arabia joined the two rights groups last week in rejecting the candidacies of their countries.

“As someone who suffered for 19 years from the Castro regime’s beatings, solitary confinement, and inhumane treatment, I urge the U.N. to reject Cuba’s candidacy next week,” said Guillermo Estevez, who showed the crowd his scars from beatings by Cuban authorities.

“For encouraging independent journalism in Cuba, agents harassed, stalked and beat me,” said 25-year old Liannis Merino, who left for the U.S. two years ago.

Ali Al-Ahmed of the Gulf Affairs Council said that Saudi Arabia, his native country, was one of the worst violators of human rights in the world, where basic freedoms are completely denied and women and minorities subjected to massive and systematic discrimination. Al-Ahmed and other members of his family were political prisoners in Saudi Arabia.

The report by UN Watch and Freedom House came as the UN General Assembly today prepared to elect 18 new Human Rights Council members, or one-third of the body’s membership. Each regional group is apportioned a specific number of seats. However, in three of the five regional groups — Asia, Latin America and Western Europe — the number of countries running does not exceed the number of open seats.

The study described eight countries as not qualified, including Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Russia and Saudi Arabia. All of these countries are incumbent candidates. In addition, the report questioned the eligibility of Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria and Senegal, whose human rights records are mixed.

UN Watch and Freedom House evaluated each of the 20 candidates based on its record of human rights protection at home and its record of human rights promotion at the UN. The evaluation cited a range of sources including country rankings by Freedom House, UN Watch voting analyses, reports from Reporters San Frontières, The Economist, Democracy Index, and the Democracy Coalition Project.

Click here for full report.

The post Rights Group Warns Against ‘Foxes Guarding the Chickens’; Opposes U.N. Rights Council Seats for China, Cuba, Russia, Saudi Arabia appeared first on UN Watch.

New York, May 6, 2009 — More than a third of the countries vying for seats on the United Nations Human Rights Council have dismal human rights records that should disqualify them from membership, according to a new report from Freedom House and UN Watch, presented today at U.N. Headquarters in New York at a gathering of diplomats, reporters and activists.

The report warns that at least four of the eight countries in question—Bangladesh, China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia—are virtually guaranteed seats in next week’s election because of a lack of competition from more democratic countries. Click here for new report.

“We urge the U.N. not to squander a golden opportunity to promote human rights by once again choosing the foxes to guard the chickens,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of the Geneva-based UN Watch. “Electing abusers to the U.N.’s highest human rights body dangerously gives international credibility to repressive governments that routinely violate the rights of their own citizens.”

Dissidents and former political prisoners from Cuba and Saudi Arabia joined the two rights groups in rejecting the candidacies of their countries.

“As someone who suffered for 19 years from the Castro regime’s beatings, solitary confinement, and inhumane treatment, I urge the U.N. to reject Cuba’s candidacy next week,” said Guillermo Estevez, who showed the crowd his scars from beatings by Cuban authorities.

“For encouraging independent journalism in Cuba, agents harassed, stalked and beat me,” said 25-year old Liannis Merino, who left for the U.S. two years ago.

Ali Al-Ahmed of the Gulf Affairs Council said that Saudi Arabia, his native country, was one of the worst violators of human rights in the world, where basic freedoms are completely denied and women and minorities subjected to massive and systematic discrimination. Al-Ahmed and other members of his family were political prisoners in Saudi Arabia.

Today’s report by UN Watch and Freedom House comes as the UN General Assembly prepares to elect 18 new Human Rights Council members, or one-third of the body’s membership, on May 12. Each regional group is apportioned a specific number of seats. However, in three of the five regional groups — Asia, Latin America and Western Europe — the number of countries running does not exceed the number of open seats.

The study described eight countries as not qualified, including Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Russia and Saudi Arabia. All of these countries are incumbent candidates. In addition, the report questioned the eligibility of Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria and Senegal, whose human rights records are mixed.

UN Watch and Freedom House evaluated each of the 20 candidates based on its record of human rights protection at home and its record of human rights promotion at the UN. The evaluation cited a range of sources including country rankings by Freedom House, UN Watch voting analyses, reports from Reporters San Frontières, The Economist, Democracy Index, and the Democracy Coalition Project.

The post Human Rights Abusers Poised to Take Seats on UN Council; “Don’t Let Foxes Guard the Chickens,” Urges UN Watch appeared first on UN Watch.

Speakers at May 5 briefing organized by UN Watch and Freedom House: Ali Al-Ahmed, former political prisoner in Saudi Arabia; Guillermo Estevez, former political prisoner in Cuba; Hillel Neuer, UN Watch executive director; Liannis Merino, Cuban journalist victimized by Castro regime; Paula Schriefer, Freedom House advocacy director.

UNITED NATIONS — Leading human-rights groups warned Tuesday that three countries they have dubbed the “worst of the worst” for human-rights violations are running unopposed for re-election to the United Nations Human Rights Council.

While Canada is exiting the council after a three-year term, China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia seek to hold their seats in the Geneva-based body, which the UN bills as its leading arbiter of human rights standards.

“These three are countries whose populations suffer every day,” said Paula Schriefer, advocacy director with Washington-based Freedom House. “They should be targets of Human Rights Council resolutions and special (investigatory) sessions, not running for election.”

The group includes the three in its Worst of the Worst 2009 report released Tuesday with Geneva-based UN Watch.

They are among 17 countries the report says are the most oppressive in terms of denying political rights and civil liberties.

In contrast to the finding, the three’s respective regional blocs have put them on slates containing the same amount of candidates as available seats in the 47-member council. This virtually assures their election to the body, which the UN launched in 2006 because the former Human Rights Commission had itself become dominated by abuser states.

“The vision had been that the council would be a voice for victims,” said UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer, a Montreal native. “But it is now in a state of crisis.”

Candidates need the approval of a simple majority of the 192-member states in the UN General Assembly during the elections next Tuesday.

The ballot will also see the United States stand for the first time after the administration of former President George W. Bush shunned the new body on grounds the rules weren’t tough enough to prevent abuser states from succeeding in eventually controlling it.

Neuer said Washington, which is also unopposed in its regional group, should use its diplomatic clout to highlight abuses in such places as Zimbabwe that have so far escaped special council focus.

But he conceded that, even under President Barack Obama, who pledged his administration would push for improved respect for human rights around the world, Washington may be reluctant to speak out forcefully against countries that are also allies in such causes as the war in Afghanistan.

The council’s record for its first three years is poor, according to the monitoring groups. This year alone, Islamic states with Cuban support rewrote rules for a freedom of expression monitor in a manner that limits expression, they say.

An “alliance of regressive regimes,” meanwhile, succeeded in having the council cancel human rights investigators for trouble spots such as Belarus, Cuba, Liberia, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan’s Darfur region.

In contrast, the alliance led council appointment of an investigator who had helped launch the controversial “Moammar Qaddafi Human Rights Prize,” and another who believes that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, were an inside job, the groups say.

In addition to the three “worst-of-the-worst” council candidates, the joint report says other “not qualified” candidates among the 20 standing to fill 18 vacancies include Azerbaijan, Cameroon, Djibouti and Russia.

Considered “questionable” are Bangladesh, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria and Senegal, the report adds.

Click here for joint report on candidates

The post Issue 191: UN Watch Releases Report on Human Rights Council Candidates appeared first on UN Watch.

Geneva, November 26, 2008 — UN Watch welcomed the announcement of a UN Human Rights Council emergency session on the worsening situation in eastern Congo, to be held Friday, and urged the 47-nation body to reinstate the independent monitor that it scrapped in March, and to dispatch an immediate fact-finding mission to investigate gross human rights violations, including the murder, rape, torture and looting of innocent civilians.

The Geneva-based human rights monitoring group will make the appeal formally when it addresses the council on Friday on behalf of a broad coalition of non-governmental human rights organizations.

“Morally, those countries that were behind the elimination of the monitoring mandate in March ought now to apologize to the victims of Congo,” said UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer. “We will never know how many lives could have been saved if the council, deferring to Congo’s government, had not caused this unconscionable protection gap, which slashed an early warning mechanism just when the victims needed it most.”

In March, Egypt on behalf of the African Group supported elimination of the Congo mandate, supported by Russia, Tunisia, Algeria and others.

UN Watch, Freedom House and other human rights groups campaigned for the upcoming session in letters to UN chief Ban Ki-moon and rights commissioner Navi Pillay.  See joint letter below.

A new UN report said members of the Congolese army and national police “were responsible for a large number of serious human rights violations … namely arbitrary executions, rape, torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.”

________________________________________________

November 18, 2009

United Nations High Commissoner for Human Rights Navi Pillay
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

Dear Secretary-General Ban and High Commissioner Pillay,

As you gather today with world leaders to celebrate the new chamber of the UN Human Rights Council, we urge you to take advantage of this moment to turn the international spotlight toward the human rights catastrophe in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

Mass displacement, killings and sexual violence—involving hundreds of thousands of victims, if not more—require an urgent response by the UN Human Rights Council.

We urge you to use your moral voice today by calling on the Council to immediately convene a special session for the desperate victims in the Congo. The procedure requires support from a mere one third of the Council’s 47 members. We are certain that 16 state members can be found to endorse such an initiative. If you lead, they will surely follow. If not, inaction and indifference are likely to prevail.

Precedent shows that you can have a powerful impact. Appeals issued by both your predecessors, Kofi Annan and Louise Arbour, helped pressure Council members in 2006 to convene a special session for the victims of Darfur. We urge you to do no less today for the victims in the Congo.

Such a session should immediately reinstate the human rights monitor for the DRC, whose recent elimination by the Council, which deferred to the DRC government’s opposition to any independent monitoring, was unconscionable. Further, in voting to scrap the mandate, Council members at the March 2008 session made baseless attacks on the mandate-holder, Titinga Frédéric Pacéré, and false claims about the human rights situation in the DRC.

Tunisia’s Ali Cherif spoke of “the positive developments in the human rights situation there”—indeed, “remarkable progress”—and chastised the expert because such “improvements” were “not duly reflected in [his] report.” Algeria, too, claimed “significant progress” in the DRC, where “the situation is being normalized.”

Egypt’s Omar Shalaby, on behalf of the African Group, said the DRC boasted an “environment conducive to the promotion and protection of human rights”, with “serious measures aimed at promoting the realization of economic, social, and cultural rights.” He said that “the mandate has not offered clear prospects for improving the human rights situation on the ground”; that it “has not been of benefit to the DRC”; and that “any renewal of the mandate would be counterproductive.” The mandate was one “to which no clear achievement can be attributed.” Russia, among others, supported this line, and the Council duly eliminated this independent voice for DRC victims.

We note with deep concern that since the June 2007 reform package, the Council has gradually eliminated human rights monitoring mandates for victims in Belarus, Cuba, Liberia, DRC, and Darfur. The general mandate on Sudan is slated for elimination this March. Few remain. If the Council is to have any credibility, we must turn this dynamic around.

Consequently, we urge you today to call on Council members to meet urgently in special session to address the plight of hundreds of thousands of victims in the DRC. Your moral voice can help to stop the atrocities in DRC—but you must act now.

Sincerely,
Hillel Neuer
United Nations Watch

Paula Schriefer
Freedom House

The post UN Watch to HRC: Apologize for Scrapping Congo Monitor, Send Fact-Finders to Investigate Murder and Rape of Civilians appeared first on UN Watch.

Neuer: “Foxes are guarding the chickens”

Geneva, May 21, 2008 — UN Watch expressed concern today after 114 UN General Assembly members failed to respect human rights standards by electing Pakistan to the Human Rights Council, with an even larger 142 supporting Bahrain. “We were delighted, however, that our intense efforts to defeat Sri Lanka bore fruit, though appalled that it still managed to win 101 votes,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, which is headquartered in Geneva together with the 47-nation council

According to our a detailed report by UN Watch and Freedom House, “Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bahrain, Gabon and Zambia all failed to show the minimum standards required for election to the council — yet now all but one was elected,” said Neuer.  Click here for report.

“Unless the UN stops electing the worst violators to the Human Rights Council,” said Neuer, “we will continue to have the foxes guarding the chickens — with the likes of China, Saudi Arabia and Cuba blocking action for Tibet, women’s rights or jailed journalists.”

“The reelection of Pakistan sends the wrong signal, and hurts victims worldwide. This is a country with a record of systematic violations of basic human rights, including arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, persecution of religious minorities and a judicial system that fosters violence against of women as a form of punishment,” said Neuer.

“As head of its Islamic bloc for the past two years, Pakistan has helped the council adopt a series of Orwellian resolutions that shield abusers like Sudan from scrutiny, undermine the role of independent experts, and eviscerate the international protection of freedom of speech in order to legitimize Islamic blasphemy restrictions,” Neuer added.

According to the 2006 General Assembly resolution that established the council, members are to be elected based on their ability to “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights.”

The report by UN Watch and Freedom House examined 20 candidate countries according to their record of human rights protection at home, and their support for human rights resolutions at the UN. The report cites data from their own 2008 studies as well as assessments published by Reporters Without Borders, The Economist’s Democracy Index, and the Democracy Coalition Project.

The joint report sparked a heated debate this month in the countries that were found to be “Not Qualified,” with a front-page story in Bahrain’s Gulf Daily News, editorials in Pakistani newspapers like The Post, and articles in Sri Lanka’s The Mirror, and GabonEco.
Bahrain’s ambassador in Geneva, Abdulla Abdullatif Abdulla, described the report by Freedom House and UN Watch as “unwarranted and unfounded.”

However, the UN Watch and Freedom House findings were echoed by 11 Bahraini human rights organizations—including the recently-dissolved Bahrain Centre for Human Rights—who pledged not to support Bahrain’s candidacy for a seat on the council unless the government improved civil liberties.
They demanded legislation to improve the rights of migrant workers such as housemaids, prevent racial discrimination, give redress to victims of torture, introduce citizenship equality and protect the role of human rights defenders. The demands were presented in a meeting with Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Nazar Al Baharna.
The joint report also rated the qualifications of Brazil, Burkina Faso, and East Timor as “questionable.”  Of those, only East Timor failed in today’s vote.
In a separate study, UN Watch found that the council failed to speak out for victims of the world’s most severe human rights violations.

The former Commission on Human Rights became discredited for ignoring most of the world’s violators and focusing instead on Arab-sponsored condemnations of Israel.

However, despite the attempts at reform, the new council has only aggravated that trend.

Since being created in 2006, the council adopted 19 Islamic-sponsored resolutions against Israel, including in four emergency sessions, several of which were opposed by Western states for omitting mention of attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah. Otherwise, it adopted four censures of Burma and one of North Korea.

“Although Sudan was debated several times, it has consistently escaped censure, with the help of allies in the Islamic, Arab and African groups that control the council’s majority. Several council resolutions praised the Khartoum regime for its ‘cooperation,'” said Neuer.

A recent resolution on the Democratic Republic of Congo, where 4 million have been killed, eliminated the Council’s investigation of abuses there, one of several recent moves drawing sharp critcism from human rights activists.

The post UN Watch Raps UN Election of Pakistan to Rights Council, Lauds NGO Defeat of Sri Lanka Bid appeared first on UN Watch.

According to a report presented earlier this month by UN Watch and Freedom House, at a UN Headquarters briefing for diplomats and journalists, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bahrain, Gabon and Zambia were found to be lacking the minimum standards required for election to the council. Regrettably, all but one was elected today.

Unless the UN stops electing the worst violators to the Human Rights Council, we will continue to have the foxes guarding the chickens — with the likes of China, Saudi Arabia and Cuba blocking action for Tibet, women’s rights or jailed journalists.

The reelection of Pakistan sends the wrong signal, and hurts victims worldwide. More than 160 million Pakistanis are subjected to systematic violations of basic human rights, including arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, persecution of religious minorities and a judicial system that fosters violence against of women as a form of punishment.

And as head of the council’s Islamic bloc for the past two years, Pakistan has helped the 47-nation body adopt a series of Orwellian resolutions that shield abusers like Sudan from scrutiny, undermine the role of independent experts, and eviscerate the international protection of freedom of speech in order to legitimize Islamic blasphemy restrictions.

According to the 2006 General Assembly resolution that established the council, members are to be elected based on their ability to “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights.”

The report by UN Watch and Freedom House examined 20 candidate countries (the Czech Republic later dropped out, leaving 19), based on their record of human rights protection at home, and their support for human rights resolutions at the UN. The report cites data from new UN Watch and Freedom House studies as well as assessments published by Reporters Without Borders, The Economist’s Democracy Index, and the Democracy Coalition Project.

UN Watch Report Bolsters Human Rights Activists, Sparks Heated Debate

The joint report by UN Watch and Freedom House sparked a heated debate this month in the countries that were found to be “Not Qualified,” with a front-page story in Bahrain’s Gulf Daily News, editorials in Pakistani newspapers like The Post, and articles in Sri Lanka’s The Mirror, and GabonEco.

Front page of Gulf Daily News(Bahrain) quoting UN Watch report, May 8, 2008

Bahrain’s ambassador in Geneva, Abdulla Abdullatif Abdulla, described the report by Freedom House and UN Watch as “unwarranted and unfounded.”

However, the report’s findings were echoed by 11 Bahraini human rights organizations—including the recently-dissolved Bahrain Centre for Human Rights—who pledged not to support Bahrain’s candidacy for a seat on the council unless the government improved civil liberties.

The groups demanded legislation to improve the rights of migrant workers such as housemaids, prevent racial discrimination, give redress to victims of torture, introduce citizenship equality and protect the role of human rights defenders. The demands were presented in a meeting this week with Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Nazar Al Baharna.

The joint report also rated the qualifications of Brazil, Burkina Faso, and East Timor as “questionable.” Of those, only East Timor failed in today’s vote.

Since being created in 2006, the council has adopted 19 Islamic-sponsored resolutions against Israel — as well as four emergency sessions — several of which were opposed by Western states for omitting mention of attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah. Otherwise, it has limited its concern for human rights in the world to four censures of Burma, and one of North Korea.

Although Sudan was debated several times, it has consistently escaped censure, with the help of allies in the Islamic, Arab and African groups that control the council’s majority. Several council resolutions praised the Khartoum regime for its “cooperation.”

A recent resolution on the Democratic Republic of Congo, where 4 million have been killed, eliminated the Council’s investigation of abuses there, one of several recent moves drawing sharp critcism from human rights activists.

Britain and Netherlands Threaten to Pull-Out If UN’s ‘Durban II’ Becomes Anti-Semitic Replay

The British government told parliament last week that it is considering pulling out from a UN conference on racism if it replays the acrimonious anti-Semitism of the 2001 precursor held in Durban, South Africa.

Speaking in the British parliament, U.K. Minister for Europe Jim Murphy said “there should be no repeat of the disgraceful anti-Semitism that blighted events surrounding the 2001 world conference against racism.” Click for more.

A few days later, Netherlands Interior Minister Maxime Verhagen said his country will not accept any attempts to call Israel a racist state at next year’s “Durban II” conference, the date and venue of which will be decided at a meeting in Geneva this Monday. According to Radio Netherlands, Verhagen said that the Netherlands was involved in the organization of Durban II and would not hesitate to withdraw if there is a similar negative spiral of events.

With Iran’s Ahmadinejad again calling to destroy the Jewish state at the same time as his government serves on the Durban II planning committee — headed by Libya’s Qaddafi — Britain, Netherlands and other leading democracies are right to be both concerned and vigilant.

UN Urgent Session on Hunger to Ignore Starving Burmese

At the initiative of Cuba’s Raoul Castro regime, the UN Human Rights Council will tomorrow convene an emergency “special session” to address rising food prices. Several EU states, including the U.K., also added their names to the Cuban request.

The world food crisis is certainly an urgent issue. But few expect this meeting to achieve anything other than provide a platform for attacks against the West and free markets. All of which will distract the council from matters it could more suitably address, starting with violations that have a clear victim, perpetrator and remedy. But the countries that lock people up without fair trials prefer to change the subject.

And if “the right to food” were really their concern, why will the session ignore Myanmar’s unconscionable denial of that right for millions of its starving, post-cyclone citizens?

When this question was posed yesterday to the UN, the reply was that “the Council had a very full programme. . .so it was a pretty packed schedule at the moment and it would be difficult to fit it in.”

The post Issue 175: Pakistan Wins Return to UN Rights Council, Sri Lanka Loses appeared first on UN Watch.