Now Saudi Arabia Wants Seat on UN Rights Body

By Patrick Goodenough
April 25, 2006
CNS News 
Original Source: http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200604/INT20060425a.html


(CNSNews.com) - Saudi Arabia has become the latest undemocratic state with a poor human rights record to seek a seat on the United Nation's new Human Rights Council.

With elections for the body just two weeks away, the number of controversial would-be members is slowly climbing, even as human rights campaigners step up efforts to ensure the best membership possible.

The HRC was established in a bid to restore the U.N.'s standing in the human rights field, after its flagship institution, the Commission for Human Rights, was discredited when rights-abusing governments became members and then blocked criticism of themselves and their allies.

Proponents of the U.N. resolution that set up the council argued that it would be more effective than its predecessor, because the document asks the U.N.'s 191 member states to take into account candidates' human rights records before voting.

Also, each member will be subject to a periodic review, although it will still require a two-thirds majority vote to remove one of them.

Despite these touted improvements, however, among the 65 nations that have so far announced their candidacies for the HRC's 47 seats are a number whose respect for human rights is frequently questioned.

They include Iran, Cuba, China, Tunisia, Cameroon, Algeria, Pakistan, Russia, Azerbaijan -- and now Saudi Arabia, a newcomer to the list of candidates.

In a letter to other U.N. member states, requesting support for its candidacy, the Saudi government states that it has a confirmed commitment with the defense, protection and promotion of human rights.

This commitment has been manifested in its performance as a member of the Commission on Human Rights.

Yet the Islamic kingdom is on a list of the world's most repressive regimes as judged by the independent rights watchdog Freedom House, and is also designated one of eight countries of particular concern by the State Department for violating religious freedom.

Washington said earlier this month it would not stand for election for the HRC this time around. The U.S. was one of just four countries to vote against the resolution establishing the council, on the grounds it did not go far enough to resolve the problems of its predecessor.

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International were among human rights non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that supported the resolution, arguing that despite some concerns it offered the best opportunity in decades to establish a more effective rights body at the U.N.

Both organizations have now set up special websites focusing on the May 9 election for the HRC, as have several other NGOs.

On its site, Human Rights Watch records each candidate's voting record at the last two sessions of the U.N. General Assembly, gauging what percentage of its votes were pro-human rights.

Scores for the Asian HRC candidates ranged from 10 percent in the cases of Iran, Indonesia, and Malaysia to 95 percent for Japan. Saudi Arabia scored 25 percent and China and Pakistan both 15.

Of the Latin American candidates, Cuba and Venezuela voted in favor of a human rights position only 20 percent of the time, while at the other end of the scale, Nicaragua and Peru scored 100 percent.

Other low-scorers among nations hoping to be elected onto the HRC include Russia (25), Bahrain (20) and Bangladesh (20).

Among the African contenders, the pro-human rights vote percentages ranged from 35-55 percent, while the nine candidates from the Western European and Others group all scored 100 percent.

Eye on the U.N., a Hudson Institute project monitoring the world body, has also compiled an evaluation of the HRC candidates. It cites Freedom House rankings, and notes that 13 of the candidates are not free while another 20 are partly free and 32 are free.

The HRC will meet for the first time in Geneva on June 19.