[ad_1]
MORNING
July 6, 2018
(excerpts)
Request two days of global consultation on business and human rights
The Human Rights Council this morning adopted six resolutions, particularly on Syria. It extended for one year the terms of reference of the special rapporteurs on Belarus and Eritrea. He also requested the Working Group on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations to convene a two-day global consultation on the role of national human rights institutions in facilitating appeals. against violations of human rights. The Council extended the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus for a period of one year, with 19 votes in favor, 6 against and 21 abstentions, and requested the Special Rapporteur to submit a report on the situation of human rights in Belarus to the Council at its forty-first session and to the seventy-fourth session of the General Assembly.
The mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Eritrea has been extended for a period of one year, without a vote. The Council requested the Special Rapporteur to submit and present a written report at its forty-first session and to engage in an interactive dialogue with the General Assembly on his report at its seventy-third session.
The Council requested the Working Group on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises to convene a two-day global consultation on the role of national human rights institutions in facilitate access to remedies against human rights violations; With regard to the human rights situation in Syria, the Council decided, by 26 votes to 5, with 15 abstentions, to urge all parties to the conflict to comply with their respective obligations in respect of human rights in Syria. under international law of human rights and international humanitarian law. The Council also demanded that all parties refrain from launching attacks against the civilian population and civilian objects and that all parties work towards a genuine political transition based on the relevant United Nations resolutions.
the Council requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to prepare a thematic report on new technologies and their impact on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of bademblies, including peaceful protests. 19659005] In a resolution on the space of civil society, the Council decided by 35 votes to 11 with 11 abstentions to ask the High Commissioner to prepare a report on the progress made in the improvement the participation of international and regional civil society. international organizations and to submit it to the Human Rights Council at its forty-fourth session.
The draft texts were: Switzerland, Russian Federation, Ireland, Tunisia, China, Norway, Austria on behalf of the European Union, Djibouti, Somalia and the United Kingdom.
Belarus, Eritrea and Syria spoke as countries concerned. [19659005LaSuisselaSlovaquieaunomdel'Unioneuropéennel'EgyptelePakistanlePanamalaBelgiquelaChineleChilil'Equateurl'AfriqueduSudleRoyaume-Unil'AustralieetleVenezuelaontfaitdescommentairesgénérauxLePérouleChililaTunisielaBelgiquelaChineleRoyaume-UniPanamaEgypteIrakSlovaquieBrésilSénégalCubaVenezuelaPakistanQatarSlovaquieaunomdel'UnioneuropéenneEquateuretMexiqueontexpliquéleurvoteavantouaprèslevote
The Council will continue to decide on the resolutions and decisions before concluding its thirty- eighth session.
Action on the resolution on the situation of human rights in Eritrea
resolution (A / HRC / 38 / L.15 / Re v.1) on the human rights situation In Eritrea, adopted without a vote, the Council decided to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Eritrea for a period of one year; requests the Special Rapporteur to present and present a written report to the Human Rights Council at its forty-first session and to engage in an interactive dialogue with the General Assembly on his report at its sixty-first session; -third session; decides to hold an enhanced interactive dialogue on the human rights situation in Eritrea at its fortieth session; invites the Special Rapporteur to badess and report on the situation of human rights [in Eritrea] … and, if possible, to define criteria for progress in improving the human rights situation; man and an action plan with deadlines for their implementation; and requests OHCHR to provide the Human Rights Council, at its fortieth session, with an update on the progress made in the cooperation between Eritrea and the Office and its impact on the work of the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. situation of human rights in Eritrea.
Djibouti, introducing draft resolution L.15 / Rev.1, on behalf of Somalia and other co-sponsors, stated that the main purpose of the resolution was to extend the mandate of the Rapporteur special for a year. The goal was also to update resolution 35/35 to reflect the latest developments. The Special Rapporteur noted that she was not in a position to report improvements and that major violations of human rights had been identified, including those mentioned by the Commission. # 39; investigation. The resolution would give the Council an opportunity to engage with the Special Rapporteur. Somalia and Djibouti conducted the negotiations in a transparent manner and all delegations were thanked for their contribution to the development of a streamlined, balanced and objective text.
Somalia, also introducing draft resolution L.15 / Rev.1, welcomed the Special Rapporteur and supported the extension of the one – year mandate under item 4 of the bill. agenda. Somalia has always supported the people of Eritrea in order to live free from harm and worried about the current human rights situation. The promotion of economic and social rights is welcome, but the voices of victims must be heard
Slovakia, in a general comment on behalf of the European Union, remains concerned about the situation in Eritrea, particularly in which concerns the responsibility for past violations. The situation required continued follow-up and, therefore, an extension of the mandate for an additional year was warranted. He urged the government to work expeditiously on the establishment of an office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Eritrea and looked forward to Eritrea's progress and the implementation of the recommendations of Eritrea. the forthcoming Universal Periodic Review.
speaking as a country concerned, the Human Rights Council again considered a politically motivated resolution against the Eritrean people. In the last six years, similar resolutions have failed to create dividends in the promotion of human rights; and it was another unjustified act that recapitulated the failed experiment of this Council. This year's resolution came at a time when Eritrea and Ethiopia were committed to promoting lasting peace with an apparently positive implication for the Horn of Africa region. The Council, instead of acting in harmony with this positive regional development, chose to encourage Djibouti and Somalia to perpetuate their messenger duties for those who had no interest in peace and security. security of the region. The adoption of this resolution sent a clear message to the Eritrean people: the Human Rights Council condemned the defamation of their history and their struggle for peace, justice and development in the region . Eritrea rejected the resolution and called on all Council members to reject L.15.
Egypt, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that the Horn of Africa was witnessing very important developments and that she would have preferred the draft resolution to be adopted. 39 is supporting these events to help the region. Egypt advocated for African solutions to African problems and for setting up an optimal framework for addressing political problems and challenges. In this regard, Egypt stressed the importance of rejecting selective resolutions and mandates, which politicized the work of the Council and would not lead to positive engagement and constructive dialogue. Egypt regretted that Somalia and Djibouti both insisted on submitting the draft resolution. The draft resolution was not supported by the country concerned, which was another reason for Egypt to oppose it.
China, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, recalled that it consistently advocated that differences be resolved dialogue and cooperation. The international community should recognize the progress and achievements of Eritrea in the field of human rights. The draft resolution does not conform to that. China called on the international community to address the situation in Eritrea in an objective and transparent manner.
The Council then adopted draft resolution L.15 / Rev.1 without a vote.
Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic
In a resolution (A / HRC / 38 / L.20) on the situation of human rights in the Arab Republic Syrian Arab Republic, adopted by 26 votes to 5, with 15 abstentions, the Council deplores the fact that the conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic continues in its eighth year with its devastating impact on the civilian population and urges all parties to the conflict to Immediately refrain from any action that may contribute to the deterioration of the situation. human rights, security and humanitarian situations; urges all parties to the conflict to respect their respective obligations under international human rights law and international humanitarian law and demands that all parties, in particular the Syrian authorities and their allies, abstain any attack on the civilian population and civilian property; demands that all parties cease immediately any use of chemical weapons; reiterates the importance of establishing appropriate processes and mechanisms to achieve justice, reconciliation, truth and accountability for gross violations and violations of international law, as well as for reparations and reparation; effective remedies for victims; reaffirms that there can only be one political solution to the conflict … and calls on all parties to work towards a genuine political transition based on the Geneva communiqué and resolution 2254 (2015 ) of the Security Council, as part of the intra-Syrian process.
The results of the vote are as follows:
Favorable (26): Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Ivory Coast, Croatia, Ecuador, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Togo, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates and United Kingdom
Against (5): Burundi, China, Cuba, Iraq and Venezuela [19659005] Abstentions (15): Afghanistan, Angola, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Senegal, South Africa and Tunisia.
United Kingdom, introducing draft resolution L.20, on behalf of a group of They stated that they took no pleasure in presenting this resolution once again. It was not in anger but in sorrow. A violent offensive was under way, led by the regime and its allies, including Russia, in southern Syria. More than 330,000 people fled their homes and all parties were asked to cease hostilities. The conflict was to end and the efforts of Special Envoy Staffan de Mistura were supported for this to happen. The purpose of the resolution was to emphasize the need for accountability and to strengthen the prospects for peace. The text contained stronger language on basic issues such as arbitrary detention, badual and gender-based violence, internally displaced persons, illegal arms transfers, and laws on housing and property. The resolution reflected the conclusions of the commission of inquiry. It was hoped that the text would be adopted without a vote and would benefit from the consensus support of all in the Council. If a vote was called, all delegations were invited to support the text as it was drafted.
The Russian Federation, introducing amendments L.28, L.29, L.30 and L.31, has repeatedly stated that the initiative of the so-called Group of Friends of Syria was politicized and had nothing to do with protecting civilians. The armed groups in Syria were supported by some of the sponsors of the draft resolution. The proposed amendments are not intended to make the draft resolution more balanced, because that is impossible. The Russian Federation called on all states not to support terrorists and not to sympathize with them. The terrorists in Syria used chemical weapons: where did they find components to produce these chemical weapons? It was clear that the sponsors of the draft resolution did not want an independent and impartial investigation into the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Terrorists in Syria were funded by various parties, including private parties. Some countries in the region provided them with weapons, equipment and information technology. It is not surprising that the sponsors of the draft resolution are opposed to Russia's amendments. The last amendment, L.31, dealt with the drastic unilateral coercive measures against Syria, which had a strong impact on civilians. Russia called on all countries to vote in favor of its amendments.
The United Kingdom, in a general commentary, called for a vote on the amendments.
Slovakia, in a general comment on behalf of the European Union, expressed particular concern at the recent escalation of violence in south-west Syria, including the regime's air strikes and its allies, who have already forced more than 330,000 civilians out of their homes and destroyed critical infrastructure, including several health facilities. The European Union called for an immediate cessation of hostilities, respect for the de-escalation agreement and full humanitarian access to all Syrians in need. He reiterated that there could be no military solution to the Syrian conflict. Contrary to this, since last year, the Syrian regime, backed by its allies Russia and Iran, had intensified its military operations without regard to civilian casualties. The European Union also expressed deep concern over the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Afrin as a result of the Turkish military operation. She reiterated her appreciation for the vital work that the Inquiry Commission and the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism continued to lead. He welcomed the strengthening of terminology deploring national legislation, such as "Syrian Law Number 10/2018", which would have a significant negative impact on freedom of movement and the right of Syrians displaced by the conflict of come back. He therefore called for its repeal. For all these reasons, the European Union will vote in favor of the draft resolution and urge all members of the Human Rights Council to do likewise.
Venezuela, in a general comment, expresses its support for the amendments tabled by Russia, urging Council members to vote in favor of these amendments.
Australia, expressing in a general comment, said that the Inquiry Commission had documented crimes against humanity and war crimes. The focus on badual and gender-based violence in the text has been well received. The stronger wording of the resolution was also welcomed. All parties, in particular the Government, have been invited to cease hostilities and engage in a constructive dialogue. All members were urged to oppose the amendments tabled by Russia.
Switzerland, in a general comment, was extremely concerned by all the violations committed by all parties. Switzerland had co-sponsored the resolution and could not support the amendments. However, some paragraphs weakened the applicability of the resolution. The report of the investigation commission documented all the violations. Since justice must be provided to all victims, it was essential that the Inquiry Commission, civil society and the impartial and independent International Mechanism cooperate. The situation in Syria was to be submitted to the International Criminal Court. All parties to the conflict have been called to restore the ceasefire.
Syria, as a concerned country, stated that the unrealistic resolutions submitted to the Council each session were intended solely to consecrate the Council to serve political interests disconnected from the values of rights. The goal was to spread invented stories to hide terrorism backed by sponsoring countries. The sponsors of the draft resolution continued to lay charges against the Syrian government and conceal its cooperation with human rights agencies. Contrary to the allegations contained in the draft resolution, the Syrian Government has spared no effort to engage in appeasement initiatives. Syria reaffirmed its commitment to international humanitarian law and emphasized that those who have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity must be held accountable. However, these crimes were committed by the US-led coalition. It is not surprising that states sponsoring terrorism have violated the United Nations Charter and international law. The Board was compelled to consider matters for which it was technically not equipped. The draft British resolution and the language used did not favor the objectives of peace in Syria
Action on draft resolution L.20
Ecuador, in an explanation of the vote before the vote , expressed the hope that those who commit human rights violations, including those who provided weapons or funds, will be brought to justice, including before the International Criminal Court. They were responsible for the deaths of thousands of people and the expulsion of millions of people. The migration crisis was the result of what was happening in Syria. Violations of human rights and international humanitarian law in Syria included siege tactics, the use of civilians as human shields and famine, all of which were crimes against humanity. The hope was expressed that investigations would be conducted soon. Draft resolution L.20 does not balance the sentence and the proposal for action. Yet, on the basis of its principles of promoting human rights, Ecuador decided to vote in favor of the resolution.
Venezuela, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, has always condemned the selectivity and double the Council which provided no benefit to the victims. Venezuela called for a real commitment to a political solution and dialogue that would establish a lasting peace. Venezuela will vote against the resolution.
Cuba, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, reiterated its support for a peaceful solution in Syria with full respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country. He reiterated his condemnation of the killing of all civilians and acts of terrorism. However, attempts to exploit this tragic situation and to feed the geopolitical interest of countries outside the region were also condemned, as they spurred the aggression. The project did not contribute to a just and peaceful solution and Cuba demanded that L.20 be put to the vote.
China, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, supported the request for a vote on the draft resolution. . He has always argued that a political solution to the Syrian conflict was the only way to promote human rights in this country. Stressing the need to preserve the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria, China noted that the draft resolution did not promote a political solution and that it would vote against the draft resolution
Mexico, in an explanation of the vote before the vote. , expresses its deep concern at the grave situation Syria continues to face and will therefore vote in favor of the draft resolution. He called on all parties to the conflict to show their commitment to civilians and victims of human rights violations. It is also essential to call on all countries to refrain from transferring arms to any party to the conflict, as this will only lead to the intensification of the conflict.
Brazil, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that it remained deeply concerned about the rights of Syrian civilians. He praised the efforts of the international community to deal with human rights, while noting the unbalanced nature of the text that was voted on today. He regretted that the violations perpetrated by armed groups in eastern Syria's Ghouta had been omitted from the text. He condemned any use of chemical weapons by any party. Impartial investigations were needed from the competent authorities, with clear expertise in the field. Brazil reminded the Human Rights Council that everyone has the right to enjoy peace. There was no complete protection of human rights if people could not find peace. In this sense, the inquiry commission's recommendation that the international community should refrain from providing support, including weapons, to any party to the conflict, should be respected.
Iraq explains the vote before the vote. expressed his point of view against the practice of selectivity in the Human Rights Council, which was a departure from the achievement of its work and objectives. The draft resolution in question contains ideas that preceded the results of the inquiry commission. In addition, some parties have been described as terrorist parties, contrary to Security Council resolutions. In addition, the draft resolution does not take into account recent developments on the ground. It does not refer to international solidarity in terms of rebuilding Syria and setting up an environment necessary for the return of refugees. Nor did he refer to the financial resources needed by the UN to provide relief to Syria. In addition, it does not cover areas besieged by terrorist groups. The draft resolution is unbalanced and does not aim to find an objective solution to the crisis. In fact, it only served armed groups and terrorists who perpetuated the situation. He did not serve the people of Syria. Therefore, Iraq will vote against, and calls on all others to do the same.
Egypt, in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that it has a principled position on point 4 of the resolutions that did not receive the consent of the country in question . In the light of the humanitarian disaster that entered its seventh year and given the scale of the crisis and the number of people involved, Egypt has decided to abstain from voting. The resolution lacked balance and objectivity. The sources of the resolution were unofficial sources, not the official sources of the United Nations. The draft resolution welcomes the investigative mechanisms put in place by the resolution of the General Assembly to which Egypt has abstained. On this basis, Egypt will abstain.
The Council then adopted draft resolution L.20, with 26 votes in favor, 5 against and 15 abstentions.
For the use of information means; not an official record
Source link
