Human-rights panel reform falls short
Our Opinion: U.N. Plan does little to separate wolves from the sheep

February 28, 2006
Miami Herald
Original Source: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/editorial/13977989.htm

The United Nations plan to reform its discredited Human Rights Commission is a major disappointment. The heart of the matter comes down to a need for genuine improvement in the quality of the panel's membership, but this proposal does little to separate the wolves from the sheep. If the United Nations wants to have any credibility whatsoever when it comes to human rights, it must come up with a better plan.
Commission a farce
Secretary General Kofi Annan deserves credit for realizing that the existing Human Rights Commission has become a farce, what with major human-rights violators such as Cuba and Sudan on the panel. The problem is, the proposed changes will prove no hindrance to membership by these countries.
Mr. Annan tried to make the best of the reform plan unveiled last week by saying that ''there are enough good elements on this to build on.'' That's hardly a strong endorsement. When the reform plan was outlined one year ago, it required that countries be elected by a two-thirds majority, a tougher standard than the existing rule that permits selection by a simple majority of those voting. Instead, the new draft would require a majority of all General Assembly members -- 96 votes. That's better than the existing rule but not as good as the two-thirds plan and hardly an obstacle to membership.
It makes no sense to allow Cuba to have any role in protecting the human rights of the international community when it violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on a daily basis. Under the current draft, any country that can make a backroom deal for votes can win a seat. The draft merely asks that U.N. members ''take into consideration'' the human-rights record of the candidate country, without obliging them to abide by conventional human-rights standards.
The proposal contains just enough concessions to attract the support of legitimate human-rights organizations, such as Amnesty International. These include a declaration that council members uphold high standards of human rights and cooperate with the council. In theory, that would rule out Cuba and other human-rights outlaws, but that leaves it up to the council to enforce the rules against other member nations -- an iffy proposition.
Compromises allowed
The chance to reform the rights panel comes along only once in a generation. Getting this far hasn't been easy, and, yes, compromises must be made. But human-rights supporters must ensure that cosmetic changes don't take the steam out of the drive to make a clean break with the past. This opportunity is the best chance for meaningful change that we are likely to have for a long time. It must not be allowed to slip away.