[QODLink]
Archive
UNHCHR criticised for political inertia
Diplomats and activists have criticised the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights, saying the institution enables human suffering to go on unchecked.
Last Modified: 18 Apr 2004 09:27 GMT
UNHCHR: An institution to end rights abuses or not?
Diplomats and activists have criticised the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights, saying the institution enables human suffering to go on unchecked.

Speaking to journalists on Sunday, Human Rights Watch's Lubna Fraih said the UNHCHR was at best a political beast made up of 53 member states with individual agendas that trade votes for good political relations.

"The problem is that it is down to political games and political trickery, vote swapping and horse trading about different issues."
  
Chitsaka Chipaziwa, Zimbabwe's ambassador to the UN, said the lack of a resolution on Iraq was a clear example of the selectivity and double standards in favour of western countries that had become enshrined in the commission.
  
"We felt it odd, many of us, that when over 600 civilians are killed in a matter of days in Falluja nobody discusses that. 
  
"What kind of human rights are we talking about if we cannot address the fundamental human right, which is the right to life itself?" he asked.
  
Commission response

Mary Whelan, Ireland's ambassador who is acting on behalf of the European Union at the commission, said Brussels proposed for discussion what it considered to be priority cases - such as a resolution on North Korea - at the forum. 
  

"The best way for countries to avoid a resolution against them is to become a commission member"

Adrien-Claude Zoller,
president of Geneva for
Human Rights

"Those who make that argument [for a resolution on Iraq], they should act on that argument," she said.
  
The commission, which is due to wrap-up its annual six-week session on 23 April, is widely seen as a place where member states such as China, Russia and the United States use their political influence on other parties to avoid condemnation of their human rights record.
  
Chamber of impunity?

Seated in circular rows with commission chairman Mike Smith at the head under a giant projector screen, states vote electronically on various issues from the country resolutions to broader measures on economic and social rights.
  
Each nation's vote is displayed on the screen with the total yes, no or abstention tally at the bottom, facilitating block votes that protect the big players from inspection, critics said. 

"The best way for countries to avoid a resolution against them is to become a commission member so they can decide on themselves," said Adrien-Claude Zoller, president of the non-governmental organisation Geneva for Human Rights.
  
"The commission on human rights has become a chamber of impunity."

Source:
Reuters
Topics in this article
Organisation
Featured on Al Jazeera
'Justice for All' demonstrations swell across the US over the deaths of African Americans in police encounters.
Six former Guantanamo detainees are now free in Uruguay with some hailing the decision to grant them asylum.
Disproportionately high number of Aboriginal people in prison highlights inequality and marginalisation, critics say.
Nearly half of Canadians have suffered inappropriate advances on the job - and the political arena is no exception.
Featured
Women's rights activists are demanding change after Hanna Lalango, 16, was gang-raped on a bus and left for dead.
Buried in Sweden's northern forest, Sorsele has welcomed many unaccompanied kids who help stabilise a town exodus.
A look at the changing face of North Korea, three years after the death of 'Dear Leader'.
While some fear a Muslim backlash after café killings, solidarity instead appears to be the order of the day.
Victims spared by the deadly disease are reporting blindness and other unexpected post-Ebola health issues.